According to reports, a threat against a witness for UK reparative Lesley Pilkington has postponed her hearing before the British Association for Counseling and Psychotherapy. I have heard through sources there that the threat is being investigated. Ms. Pilkington is being scrutinized due to her statements about homosexuality made to Patrick Strudwick, a journalist who went undercover to find out how a reparative therapist operated.
On the 17th, Ms. Pilkington went on radio to explain her approach and discuss the situation. Click the link to hear the broadcast.
In it, she refers to the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) as the largest reparative therapy organization in the world. I suppose it is, but she doesn’t mention that there are fewer than 100o members, with a smaller subset actually having advanced mental health degrees.
When asked by the host how one can convert someone from gay to straight, Ms. Pilkington said surveys show that “daddy issues,” namely relationship with father is the main factor involved. She says that the bond is the problem, but then hastens to add that “we’re not blaming parents, I am not blaming any father at all.” Hearing the contradiction, the host asks if Pilkington’s husband failed their son (he is gay), and she answered, “we don’t use words like that.” However, she then says, “there were serious mistakes” and adds that there was “a failure at some level.”
This kind of double speak is typical of my interactions with reparative therapists. Pilkington says reparative therapists don’t use the word fail, and then she uses it in the next breath. Reparative therapists often say they are not blaming the parents, and then proceed to do so.
Mrs. Pilkington then says she seeks to bring healing in her therapy because “there will always be pain.” No doubt in any therapy situation, one can find something that is painful. However, finding pain in the life of someone who is gay does not mean that it relates to the cause of the sexual orientation. Furthermore, many gays with warm, loving parents would have to manufacture problems in order to meet up with Mrs. Pilkington’s expectations.
Finally, Pilkington conflates spiritual healing with the repair of some kind of parent-child break. She believes God can heal the relationship problems which she is sure are at the root of the same-sex attraction. Sadly, when the religious techniques don’t work to effect change, as is often true, the result can be despair and a sense of failure. I know of young men who have become disillusioned with their faith, leaving it since it promised change without delivering on the promise.
Emily,
I agree with you that the language is not yet there for many. Did you know the word homosexual has only existed about 150 years?
David, she is also defrauding the NHS.
I do, too. I don’t buy the “behavior/identity/lifestyle” reduction — or the term SSA. I hate “SSA”. Makes it sound like a disorder or disease, which it is not. I call all of this “squishy” ex-gay lingo “Exodus Newspeak” and it has always bothered me immensely.
Warren has called their approach “reframe and resist”, not acutal “reorientation”. He’s right on that. I recently asked a long-term Exodus leader who has since left the organization if, in all his years with Exodus, he had ever met a gay man who had become heterosexual through Exodus. He understood the question clearly. His blunt answer? “Not one.” (And he used to proudly call himself “ex-gay”.)
Now they say the opposite of “homosexuality” is “holiness”, not heterosexuality. Exodus once actually officially defined “homosexuality” and “heterosexuality”. At that time (about 1991) they were clear that being homosexual was about “romantic, emotional and sexual attraction.”, Their definition of “heterosexuality”, on the other hand, said nothing of heterosexual “attraction” as part of being “ex-gay”, only the “ability to relate to the opposite sex without fear or distaste”. Heck, by that defintion, some straight people aren’t straight.
When I pointed this out to then President, Bob Davie, they just removed all definitions and have left things “squishy” ever since. As one female co-founder of Exodus admits, “Exodus has always had a problem with definitions.” Personally, I think it’s often deliberate.
Hey, I am all for diversity. And being clear about language. 🙂
Ann, did you not read Warren’s request?
I suggest Warren delete these last two comments as well so the thread can veer back on topic. Otherwise I reply to your new comment, you reply, someone else chimes in, etc.
Or “Queer”
Yes I did. Before that, the common word was “sodomite,” or “pervert,” or “invert,” or “bugger,” or maybe even “dirty filthy diseased ‘it.'”
I’m not sure we have develop the language to describe the human experience.
Warren,
I appreciate your observations about reparative therapy. The double speak, despair, and disillusionment very much describe my experiences in ex-gay ministry counseling and professional Christian counseling. Thank you for articulating the confusing and negative results of ‘ex-gay’ counseling so well.
The views you express on your blog continue to surprise me over the years. I assumed you would defend a Christian counselor from what some view as religious persecution by her professional organization and a bias reporter.
I have my own conflicted feelings about my Christian counseling experience. In some sense I agree with Pilkington’s defense. I, like Pilkington’s clients, willing sought a conservative Christian counselor, so it is hypocritical to protest the underlying religious doctrines the counseling is based upon. However, I do think the counseling I received and the psychological theories about homosexuality that were applied were harmful.
What has continually annoyed me about the ex-gay ‘counselors’ is the tendency keep a very squishy definition. Whether they are professionally accredited like Pilkington or lay counselors, they seem to seek the best benefits of being both a religious advocate and professional therapist. It seems Pilkington is arguing, in part, that any criticism by the professional board is religious persecution. Simultaneously, she wants to keep her professional certification so she appeals to her conservative Christian clientele as a therapist with more training and certification than the average reverend or religious layman.
Amen.
So do I. More than I can count.
Mary,
Perhaps you missed my response in all the recent posts, but I would appreciate it if you would explain what you are referring to in this comment.
Mary# ~ Jan 24, 2011 at 12:24 am
“You either have a short memory as to what you agreed to”
Michael,
Don’t read so much into it. Take it as simply as possible – maybe we are a diverse people.
I know! I don’t like the squishy definitions either but that’s sort of what we are left with. Things aren’t so black and white as many intersexed people will tell you. there is a lot of variation in people’s lives and trying to quantify anyone in categories may not work.
What if we really saw ourselves as people. Just people. Niether Jew nor gentile, niether man nor woman, etc..etc.. just people of Christ.
Ken,
My mistake. I thought we were on the same page with a couple of ideas but I see that is not the case.
The only one here that I recognize is Exodus – are they well endowed, well, monitarily that is? Also is the FRC the Family Research Center? I don’t know anything about them except I have heard their name. The others I don’t know at all. How do you know they are backed with a lot of money?
Ok, yes, I have heard of them. I think the head person ( a lady ) was on Larry King once when I was watching.
Ann# ~ Jan 24, 2011 at 4:57 pm
“How do you know they are backed with a lot of money?”
Because the spend a lot on anti-gay campaigns in various states around the US. Many of them have used used their anti-gay stances for fund-raising.
We do a fairly decent job of it. And we can always endeavor to be as clear and honest as possible.
Mary, by “intersexed” do you mean “intermediate or atypical combinations of physical features that usually distinguish female from male”?
According to wikipedia, “This is usually understood to be congenital, involving chromosomal, morphologic, genital and/or gonadal anomalies, such as diversion from typical XX-female or XY-male presentations, e.g., sex reversal (XY-female, XX-male), genital ambiguity, sex developmental differences. An intersex individual may have biological characteristics of both the male and the female sexes.”
Are you suggesting that “ex-gay/post/former” gays have such congenital, chromosomal, morphologic, genital and/or gonadal anomalies”? Do you describe yourself as such?
BTW: I do accept people as people — of equal dignity and value regardless of what labels they may or may not apply to themselves. The labels only help to describe sexual orientation (gay, bi, straight, etc.) They are not meant to define the totality or “identity” of the “person”. At least, that is not how I used these terms. I’m a gay male. My brother is a straight male. That’s all. No negative or positive implications about us as people.
As long as conservatives push for some kind of simplistic reason and change, they work to further the gay community. I have to smile at this 🙂
What or who is NOM?
NOM. National Organization for Marriage.
Jayhuck, exactly. And let’s not forget NOM, Ann – revenues of $8M last year raised from a very few donors whose names the organizations refuses to disclose in defiance of the courts that have found against them. Inciting hatred against us has become big business and a lot of people make very good livings from it.
The lie of ‘choice’ is central to the attack upon us. If orientation is innate then it becomes much more difficult to blame us, to call us immoral and the rest of it. Remove choice and those attacks can be clearly seen for what they are: irrational and founded upon ignorance. Hence the insistence that we ‘choose’ our ‘lifestyle’. The new lie is that the push for acceptance will somehow ‘silence’ Christians. This is as preposterous as the lie that if we can marry it will somehow destroy marriage itself. I notice that in this puff piece by a narrowly focused ‘Christian news’ organization (in other words, NOT the BBC) much is made of ‘threats’. Personally I don’t believe it. It’s a new line of attack against us, that we are somehow unhinged and determined to carry out some ‘radical’ agenda.
I don’t think it will take as long as you, David Roberts. Perhaps because I work in the theatre where the issue isn’t an issue at all. It used to be, perhaps 20 years ago. But not any more. I don’t mind queer, though I suppose it depends who’s using it. I don’t much like ‘gay’ which I find trivializing. I look forward to the day one’s orientation is like one’s eye color, an aspect of who we are and not the defining feature.
We all got used to cell phones. I daresay we can all get used to me referring to my husband. Including me. I never thought that would happen in my lifetime but it has. Thank you, Canada. And it would be happening here were it not for the well-funded efforts of organizations named above.
Speaking of abortions – when it became known that a heart begins beating at 3 weeks gestation, that fact has changed many minds about when life begins. If a life isn’t viable, then why does it’s heart have to be stopped, and it’s life terminated? Usually a woman does not even know she is pregnant until 5-6 weeks gestation, after the heart starts beating. Before that knowledge became available, people were believing what information they had and basing their decisions on that and I would tend to think that if they knew what they know now, some women would not follow through with the abortion.
Couldn’t the same be true about the myriad of thoughts and opinions on sexual orientation? We know what we know now and our thoughts follow that knowledge. I still maintain that, when we know more, our thoughts tend to shift in one direction or the other – rarely do we stay in the middle. Right now we have very limited knowledge about orientations and yet there seems to be so many people who think they know all the answers.
Parent-child break – 40 years later and this idea still exists – WOW – despite the evidence of so many groups – It says a great deal about religion
Ken,
Whether it be this particular UK therapist or the one around the corner, the role of the therapist should never be to “convert” a client/patient.
To be fair, I don’t think that Exodus officially teaches that homosexuality (sexual orientation) is a “choice”. They do teach that behavior, “identity” and “lifestyle” are choices. They believe that we choose whether or not to act on or “identify” with what they refer to as “SSA”, but not that the “Same Sex Attractions” themselves are a matter or choice.
Ann –
I meant viable outside the womb. That isn’t possible until at least 27 weeks, if I”m not mistaken. And yes I knew that scientifically accurate yet irrelevant factoid already.
But congratulations on NOT changing my positions on abortion OR sexual orientation. Not even close. Way to go, champ!
For some, it does not fit in with their belief system.
I know a mother who has a gay son. He pines away for someone to love but feels it is against his religion. His mother has encouraged him to accept being gay and go find someone to love. Her thinking is “Why doesn’t he just go to church that believes it is acceptable?”
Well, that just isn’t what he believes. He is more comfortable in his faith though his desires are in conflict with his faith. It’s his choice. He is fuly aware of gay affirming therapy.
This is your belief and I believe your conviction about it. Others may or may not believe you and that is why I said earlier that if there is evidence that cannot be refuted and it is widely publicized as such by a respected a credible individual, then anything anyone else would say to the contrary, would be a moot point.
Isn’t it correct to say that the vast majority of NARTH’s membership are pastors and other laymen? Warren?
@Ann
There is no serious contention on the issue among scientific and medical communities, the contention is almost entirely over religious interpretations and those who hold them. Are you suggesting that religious contention (on any subject) commonly ceases after scientific enlightenment? What world have you been living in?
RE: NARTH, the member numbers are fuzzy, but several years ago, I was told that there “around 1000 members” mostly pastors and laypeople. The professional members (those with degrees in mental health) were under 200.
Ann,
Do you realize that that the the vast majority of scientific and medical communities DO endorse and accept this?
That isn’t actually true. Most of the people who seem to have a problem with homosexuality aren’t homosexuals themselves, rather, their religion teaches them as much! I know vastly more straight people who are against living as a practicing gay person than I do homosexuals who are unhappy with their sexuality. ACtually, I don’t know any gay people who are unhappy with their sexuality but I know they are out there.
David B., I believe there are several recent active threads where your abortion comments would be appropriate and on topic.
With respect Michael, I think that’s a distinction without a difference. The very fact of labeling an inherent and innate aspect of a human being’s life with the belittling label ‘SSA’ makes the point clearly enough.
Perhaps you are looking for something about which to be outraged?
I have read Ann’s post here for several years. To the best of my knowledge, her questions and statments are truly sincere without malice. There is no armed truth or veiled meaning in her posts.
Ann,
Do you also realize that if someone truly believes in something, no amount of facts to the contrary will change their mind. Belief is a powerful thing, and sometimes people hold on tightly to beliefs that are simply wrong, regardless of evidence that contradicts those beliefs
Pick any of the several well-known and often conservative Christian anti-gay groups Ann! Do you ever listen to their rhetoric, they are always suggesting that being gay is a choice! The AFA, FRC, Exodus Intl, American Vision, CWA, just to name a few
Stephen,
Yes, and IMHO, herein lies the problem of contention. While there’s quite a bit known, it is just known as opinions and theories – nothing definitive has been declared as evidence that can be widely accepted and agreed upon. At least this is my knowledge and interpretation of it.
I am unaware of a well-funded it’s a choice crowd – what organization or group of people are you referring to that is well funded and promotes the words “it’s a choice”?
In response to the earlier question about the use of “queer” as a general descriptor for GLBTs, I have found that younger people are more likely to be comfortable with that than someone of my age (nearly 50). I still remember clearly the derogatory use of that word in a society that fully supported it’s use that way.
Depending on the community, more kids are growing up without such a harsh connection to that word. While I certainly think that is a good thing, it is by no means complete and I don’t mean to diminish the cruel treatment many still experience.
Even if the whole of society were to stop on a dime and lose all stigma and hatred of GLBTs, I suspect it would still be 50 – 100 years before our collective memory would fade enough to make things truly equal. The best we can do is set the stage for that transition.
My main point is that one should be careful with the use of that term, “queer,” as it still does pack a punch for many of us. I would suggest not initiating the use in conversation, but by the same token don’t be terribly surprised if some GLBTs (especially younger ones) use it themselves. It’s in a state of flux and I’m guessing the attraction to that term is the desire to have one word instead of many to describe a general group.
David Roberts,
I hope I have answered your questions – if not, please let me know and I will try to articulate more and / or better. As to the issue of religious views here, I think you will see that I rarely, if ever, use any kind of religious reference to prove any opinion or bias I have – in fact, I often question the use of it by others.
I couldn’t agree more Ann!
Yes, I strongly believe this – about everyone and their strongly held beliefs. Contrary to evidence pointing in another direction, some will hold onto their beliefs to accomodate their emotional comfort rather than realize they were wrong, and with that, evolve emotionally.
David Roberts,
Thank you for the clarification. I believe you now that your comment wasn’t meant as sarcasm so much as a way of punctuating a point – my sensitive nature and how you have responded to me in prior comments told me otherwise when I first read it. I am sorry.
I honestly was not thinking about religion when I made my comment. It seems to me that if the scientific and medical community have sound information and proof about the origin of orientations, and the other aspects about them, then many questions would be answered. It is my understanding that no one has this information or evidence. Right now all there is are theories and speculation and that can and does lead to lay people thinking they know the answers based on their biases. My hope would be that if these questions were answered with certitude and sound evidence by someone well respected and there was a consensus within the scientific and medical communities, regardless of what information is put forth, then speculations from other lay people who think they know the answers, would be looked upon as a moot point and the contention would subside. I did not factor in religion – now considering it, I do see where there would still be some contention as their beliefs are grounded in a different context and it supercedes any other evidence put forth or yet to be put forth or determined.
No, this is unfortunately another assumption. There was no sarcasm and it was a legitimate question.
David Roberts,
I would just like to add that, for some who are gay and content, and some who are questioning whether they are content and exploring ways to respond to that, I really don’t think any evidence is going to matter to them, as well it shouldn’t.
Ann, in science a theory is not the same as speculation. I fear that even when everything becomes known the truth will not set us free. Look how the theory of evolution is trashed. And there’s quite a lot that is already known about orientation. The problem is caused by the disinformation being put about by the extremely well-funded ‘it’s a choice’ crowd.
Ken,
If she is telling patients/clients that she can convert them, then I do disagree with this terminology and method. She does not have the power to convert anyone. Any change or shift or modification in behavior or thought comes from the patient – not a therapist. My knowledge now, subject to change with additional information, is that she used words that could also be interpreted in another way to an individual who is exploring other ways to respond to unwanted same gender attraction and/or sexual behavior.
Dave: Yes, I had daddy issues with the big aloof oak tree that brought me into the world. All he did was stand there.
Ken,
I suspect differently. I think there is more of an interest now than ever. I wish there was some established, credible and widely accepted facts on orientation so there would not be such a clash between people who think they have all the answers. The problem is we don’t have really any answers – just speculation. I believe someone who tells me they feel as though they are gay and were born with the orientation they have – I also believe people who tell me they are gay and do not think they were born with an orientation – I believe people who tell me they know why they are gay and it is because of early life experiences – I believe people who tell me they have always thought they would never fall in love with a person of the opposite gender and were surprised when they did – I believe people who tell me they could never fall in love with someone of the same gender and were surprised when they did. In other words, each person has a story and nothing scientific or medical can really back it up or dismiss it. It would be so much better if there was a widely known, acknowledged, and accepted medical and scientific reason for orientations – that way I think all the speculations and opinions and assumptions and judgments could be wiped out.
I’m not aware that I accused her of anything, though earlier she did state as a matter of fact that I was being sarcastic when I was not. I’ve made my question to her clear, and I’ve read this blog for longer than either of you have been commenting, so I’m fairly clear on her style, and yours. Thank you just the same.
Christian love in action:
“Several of us plan to bring a token of Christian love (like a small bag of cookies or other treats) to share with homosexual activists who we’ll be encountering Monday,” the group wrote in a newsletter to supporters. “It’s time we dispel lies about Christians, by tangibly showing love to people who struggle with homosexuality.”
Note the tell-tale phrase ‘struggle with homosexuality’. This is what NARTHolepsy enables. It seems innocent enough for one person to ‘struggle’. Next thing you know, I can’t get married and school kids are killing themselves.
I say again, good for this reporter to expose this fraud. He wasn’t being underhanded, SHE was. She was defrauding the NHS by peddling quack cures based on born-again thinking. Let’s hope she has to refund the money she stole. And let’s hope that this serves as a warning to people in the UK that they are after their children to brainwash them into lives of misery and self-loathing.
I am not sure how Christian love is different from other kinds of love toward people. It seems rather arrogant to me that to be loving, one has to be identified as a Christian. If someone is an activist, then I strongly disagree that they are struggling with homosexuality – I could be wrong and I am sure there are the exceptions, however, this seems like a contradiction to me.
Old terrain to revisit. Are we persuading each other?
74 comments, now 75.
BTW, any thoughts about the guy who killed all those babies, for money?
I have looked them over, not many…
Outrage lately at this sight and commenting on it seems inspired more by the possibility of cruelty, rather than actual cruelty.
Perhaps our outrage is disproportionate to the offenses we discuss; perhaps inversely so.
Ann,
What does this mean?
With all due respect Mary, the question was posed to Ann about a statement Ann made. Please be kind enough to let her respond for herself.
Jayhuck,
Yes, I do – it still seems to remain within their community though instead of being widely accepted.
Is it possible for you to ask your question wihout the sarcasm?
David,
With all due respect, I was trying to give you some perspective on Ann that you may be unaware of. Your accusation seems mean and out of place. Maybe you could familiarize yourself with more of her posts by reading them. Might give you some context in which she writes?
Where do you find these “people”. In my church (the one I currently attend), we are very concerned over global climate.
Not only is there a difference in “evangelicals” and others but keep in mind that the median age of evangelicals is changing and that effects thinking on current trends such as global warming, homosexuality etc…
Agreed.
Ann# ~ Jan 24, 2011 at 9:02 am
“I wish there was some established, credible and widely accepted facts on orientation so there would not be such a clash between people who think they have all the answers. ”
Did you even attempt to look at the link I posted, Ann? Simply because the exact mechanism(s) about what causes a person to have a particular orientation are not known, does not mean nothing is known about it. And simply because what is known about orientation doesn’t fit exactly with you or a friend of yours doesn’t invalidate what is known. That’s like saying “my uncle lou smoked 2 packs a day all his life and lived to be 85. Therefore nothing is known about lung cancer and cigarettes.”
Ann# ~ Jan 24, 2011 at 8:40 am
listen to the radio clip Warren linked to Ann. Specifically the intro by the interviewer. He talks about how some believe gays can convert to being straight (with help from the right person) then introduces Pilkington as a therapist who does that. Nowhere in the interview does she dispute it (and she heard the intro because she comments on it).
Yes the term “queer” is acceptable. It’s also acceptable for straights to use, in my opinion, when referencing the LGBT community. See also: “Queer Theory” or “Queer Studies,” classes and scholastic disciplines offered at many colleges, including those in the Ivy League.
But nobody ever says “I’m straight but I wish I were gay instead, so I’ll go to therapy to try to make that possible, at least on SOME level.” It’s always someone whose attractions are same-sex (or predominantly same-sex” that wants it to go away.
There is no scientific evidence enough on one side or the other to suggest that one has to see homosexuality as normal or not normal.
Why wouldn’t it be “normal?” Why the need to rid one’s self of same sex attraction? I don’t understand why. I understand people think it can happen (just like Warren can think he’s an Oak tree). I don’t understand WHY it would need to happen.
There are lots of heterosexuals who seeks help with their particular sexual issues.
Ken,
I don’t see anything wrong in going to a therapist who holds the same view on sexuality as the client. Unless of course they beleive that pedophelia, rape etc… etc… is acceptable.
And I would not, would not ever, want to see a therapist who told me that I had to live with being gay because that’s the way it is. There is no scientific evidence enough on one side or the other to suggest that one has to see homosexuality as normal or not normal.
So, I would not want someone who is gay telling a therpaist that the therapist violated ethical rules when that gay person knew in advance what position that therapist had on the subject. Go or don’t go – but don’t assume that everyone is going to find the therapist unethical.
We all have varying opinions on the origins and developement of sexuality.
Nothing. There’s nothing wrong with being gay, or straight, or bi, or asexual.
Which means nobody should feel compelled to “go straight” if they first were gay. Again: What do people treat all sexual orientations except for Hetero to be “problems”? Well?
Mary,
To be clear I don’t particularly care what you or any individual believes about why he or she has a certain orientation. However, I do care when professional therapists spread misleading or false information about sexual orientation,especially if they are basing therapy on that information.
Now as to the issue of people being upset about conversion therapy, i’ll give you the following hypothetical:
lets say a dr. sets up a clinic to help black people become white. Can you imagine how some people (and civil rights organizations) might be upset about that? And what if the dr. justifies his practice by saying “If black people want to be that way then fine, I’m merely providing a service for people who aren’t happy being black and helping them in their choice to be white” and then gives a bunch stats about how blacks have more problems with drugs, less education, higher crime rates etc. Do you see how some might find that offensive?
Emily K,
To get the most accurate answers, these questions should probably be posed to the individual rather than an open forum where there are biases.
My guess would be that they it is presented that way by the individual who is other than hetero and having a problem with it. If someone is just opining on sexual orientation – then it should be left at that, someone has an opinion.
I’m not sure that ‘the beliefs of the therapist’ should really be a factor in professional psychotherapy (especially when that therapy is funded by the state); the central concern must be to achieve the best possible outcome for the client. My understanding is that so doing requires that the client’s beliefs and values be taken very seriously. Those of the therapist are incidental; the duty of the therapist is to operate to the highest professional standards, putting the client’s well-being first.
Mary –
Of course it is. I don’t think Emily was suggesting otherwise, was she?
A person may disagree with what I say is the origin of my sexuality but that does not make them more accurate either. And if that is the case, don’t I have a right to seek out a therapist who’s
From Warren’s original post:-
“However, finding pain in the life of someone who is gay does not mean that it relates to the cause of the sexual orientation.”
This is perhaps the crucial statement. I might also add that ‘finding pain’ does not mean that the person’s sexual orientation is the cause of that pain. The ’cause’ might an external/environmental factor, possibly completely unrelated to sexual orientation. A good therapist would ‘spot’ that if this were the case, rather than looking only at ’causes of same-sexual orientation’.
The point is that if origin and developement are so unknown and gays go around saying they were born that way (without much adieu) then isn’t okay for people like myself to say – I wasn’t born gay but circumstances in my developement contributed to those feelings – (without much adieu) or strain against gays?
Ken – do you mind telling me how old are you?
Mary# ~ Jan 23, 2011 at 4:29 pm
“Ken, I did not ask for your opinion about claims to being born gay. ”
Then what where you asking for, when you asked this question?
“So gay people should not go around saying they were born gay and that it is unchangeable?”
Because what i gave you was an opinion, based on my knowledge of the current state of scientific understanding about sexual orientation.
prior to your question, the discussion was about the (lack of) understanding of what causes a person to have a particular orientation.
Has it ever crossed anyone’s mind that the condition of sexuality stems from a variety of sources?
You can read about the witness intimidation here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349012/Lesley-Pilkington-Gay-conversion-trial-halted-witness-intimidated.html
(note the daily mail and several other british papers do refer to it as a trial).
As to the radio interview, I found several things disturbing about it. Foremost is the fact that she is treating her own son.
Also, it is worse than simply having to manufacture problems with the parents (specifically the father). Years ago, I heard Nicolosi claim (in a tv interview) that he could show how any gay man had a broken relationship with his father. So if the client doesn’t have issues with his father, the therapist will probe until they “find” one, which is very dangerous. Especially, if the therapist finds it was the father missing the 1st grade play, or a baseball game or some other such trivial event, that triggered the rift, because now the therapist has over emphasized the significance of these events in the clients mind. And when the therapy doesn’t work (which it won’t in most cases, if any at all), there is now a rift between parent and child, which didn’t exist before the therapy.
David Roberts,
How do you apply this analogy to children in grade school or junior high school or high school? Do you think they are able to or willing to discern to the degree you are indicating or have the compassion you are referring to?
Oh. Ok. I wasn’t made aware this is what you were asking until your recent comments. Request denied.
Stephen,
You made a comment about Narth being a religious organization and that they believe that the only cure for homosexuality was to pray away the gay. This really surprised me and I asked you to show me something that validated your claim. Were you able to do that yet? If you don’t have time, I understand.
Emily, K,
OK, earlier in this thread, Michael said this about same sex attraction:
And then Stephen said this about same sex attraction:
And then David Roberts concured with this:
Would concur with them or are you saying that you (notice I didn’t use CAPS) are using the term to describe your (notice again – no CAPS) sexual orientation?
Soooo true!
Emily,
I am not interested in this – it holds no value. I am interested and concerned about how children react to that word. Again, I am going to ask you to not use it when referring to children.
lol. i should call it the “queer-brella.”
Emily,
The point being that a descriptive word of a person who belongs to a certain group is something that develops and grows over time.
Back in the day, when we were fighting for gay rights, I never expected children being born in the 80’s and 90’s to then begin to refer to any other group in a disrespectful manner. That was not our intent. We wanted fairness for diversity – not more negativity.
Ann, “Queer” is a current term and, like the term “Jew,” needn’t be derogatory, but instead descriptive.
“sodomite” and “bugger” have not achieved that status, in my observation. We don’t yet have “Sodomite Theory” offered as a class in colleges.
Emily K,
Having said this, then why would you say this:
You (no caps) don’t want anyone to change your (no caps) positions on orientation, yet you (no caps) are doing this very same thing to Randy. Seems like a contradiction to me.
More:
http://www.qyla.org/
http://www.thenation.com/blog/155219/against-bullying-or-loving-queer-kids
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer_theory
here’s one related to bullying: http://www.thenation.com/blog/155219/against-bullying-or-loving-queer-kids
Seems like now gays are not allowing people who are different find a direction and name for themselves without being called derogatory names.
"Queer" is a current term and, like the term "Jew," needn't be derogatory, but instead descriptive.Warren: As long as you don’t go around telling me I’m an oak tree. I’m fine with what you say about yourself – even if I do hold a different perspective of you.