In a thoughtful critique/commentary of my post on On Marcus Bachmann and “conversion therapy”*, Jim Burroway explores those programs’ supposed one-third success rate. Let me stress that in my post, I provided multiple caveats because I believe it to be inflated.
While I don’t agree with everything Burroway says in that post, I do recommend it as he raises a number of important issues.
In his first paragraph, he writes that I “didn’t exactly defend ex-gay therapy per se”.** I trust he recognizes that my expression about the right of Christian groups to set up such programs stems from my basic libertarian principles, the rights of individuals to establish their own organizations and associate with whom they please.
That said, as per my previous post, I remain dubious about the effectiveness of these programs. I believe it is an open question whether their “therapy” is even effective in the handful of successful “conversions.” Were they successful in changing these individuals sexuality or would that change have occurred organically, that is, without their intervention?
Given the complexity of human sexuality, I lean toward the latter view, that some people have a more “fluid” sexuality than others. And these individuals seek out such programs because they feel that while the word “gay” once described their emotional/sexual longings, it no longer works to describe their changing emotions.
*I should perhaps have used the term “reparative therapy” in quotes.
**In a subsequent post, I will address his point about coercion.
FROM THE COMMENTS: rusty offers an observation well worth considering:
Frankly, I find that a gay person’s degree of self-loathing and personal insecurity is directly related to their vehemence against reparative therapy. It’s almost as if they have to demonize it as an excuse for their own inability to accept their own choice and responsibility for their behaviors.
If we’re comfortable in our own sexuality, why would we feel threatened by “reparative therapy”?
You know who I feel really bad for? Kids forced into this by their parents.
Dooms, for once we agree on something. Will have a post on this matter either in a few hours — or a few days.
I feel bad for the kids being indoctinated in the public school system and the parents of those kids who don’t get to opt out of having their children indoctrinated. The only indoctrination I might support in the school system is one pushing abstinence for all.
if an adult seeks reparative therapy and/or counseling, without coercion, without threats of being ex-communicated by family and/or a religious institution or by suggestion of an employer. . .then go for it. . .
but my question is to that person seeking change. . .why?
what is your hope, your goal, your expectation when completing the reparative therapy.
from what randy stated, it is an ongoing process, a day to day process.
You know who I feel really bad for? Kids forced into this by their parents.
Oh, we’re sure of that, Dooms.
As we see from examples like Kevin Jennings, gays and lesbians like yourself believe in covering up the fact that you’re encouraging kids to go have sex with adults in public bus station restrooms, including not telling their parents.
But as we see from the HIV rate among teens and young adults, you CERTAINLY don’t feel sorry for what happens to those children when you’re done with them, nor do you have any interest in them as anything other than sex objects.
Well, strike that. If you can use their dead body to attack religious people, you might care about them then. But only if they’re not Republicans; in that case, as put by gay community leader Dan Savage, you wish they were dead anyway.
You know who I feel really bad for? Kids forced into believing, by their parents, teachers and race pimps, that the color of their skin is more important than education or accomplishment.
Kids taught to distrust and hate the police so much that they won’t even help each other.
Kids taught that they can beat up a white guy and the police are too terrified to call it a “hate crime”.
Kids taught to blindly vote for the party of the Klan and white supremacists who fought for decades for slavery, segregation, unarmed and poor.
Kids taught to game the system to milk as much from Uncle Sugar as possible instead of using that energy to improve their lives.
Kids who’re taught to brow beat anyone as a “raaaacist” for disagreeing.
I’m FAR more concerned about those indoctrinated kids.
The truth is the liberal bodies of the APAs and the ABA do not have any legitimate data suggesting otherwise that reparative therapy is ineffective except for the gay-affirmation therapy perpetuated by Division 44 of the APA. How about some legitimate research from the APAs instead of suppressing viable research since the reclassification of homosexuality in 1973 based on social activisim. I suggest MRI polygraphs of all members of the APAs and the ABA so as not to waste valuable time in obtaining replicable, empirical data. It would be the first legitimate science that the professional bodies have practiced since the revision of the ALIMPC in 1955 based on the fraudulent and fallacious research of Alfred Kinsey.
Wow, TGC and Northy have got some serious issues.
rjligier,
You impress me as an “informed” person in terms of the world of psychiatrists and psychoanalysts. It is curious to me why we readily assume that these people have anything but theory to expound on. Why are they any more reliable than phrenologists or handwriting analysts.
Patterns and trends can be observed and used “forensically” and lead to fairly predictable conclusions about habits and behavior. But the APA is more a political entity than they are keepers of pure science, because the “science” is very shaky.
I personally know an alcoholic psychiatrist, a psychiatrist who has chased off several wives with his addiction to credit indebtedness, a psychiatrist who is becoming morbidly obese, a psychoanalyst who dresses in black and looks like a professional Tango dancer and several more strange ducks in the shrink business.
For many, many years I was on a hospital board. A hospital has its reputation to protect, and the people in the mind reading business present by far and away the greatest challenge.
This is not, by any means, to cast aspersions on the whole crowd. But I also know that many of these folks will go beyond their capacity to diagnose and spin amazing theories. If any profession needs careful watching against themselves, this is the one. The social Darwinists ran the funny farm with their eugenics claptrap and we have not moved that far from shock treatment, lobotomies, sterilization and chemical subjugation for the sake of convenience.
I am glad you are familiar with the literature and the trends. We all need to understand that these people are not enlightened gods. They are steeped in theories and highly divergent case studies. The easiest “expert witness” to hire in a trial is an analyst that will support the necessary premise.
I suppose this all ties into Marcus Bachmann in some manner. I choose to step away from the issue, because I know little, if anything, about it. But I would say that reorienting a gay person is as fertile ground for these people as any other habit, pathology, trait, etc. they tackle.
I’m reading a fascinating book on human sexuality called Sex at Dawn. You all should read it because its premise follows that monogamy isn’t natural for human beings. It has definitely got me thinking about things. The authors rightly point out that culture has a profound impact on how we live our sexual lives. As far as sexual fluidity I truly believe it does exist.
As far as this reparative therapy, I think it’s junk science that does more harm than good. But these individuals who open these institutes can do so if they want. But it does say a lot about the indivduals who operate these organizations. In fact, I think they are dangerous once they try to enter the political arena. I think Bachmann is NOT a defender of individual rights. She’s been brought on to counter Sarah Palin. I’m still not sure about Palin, but I cannot believe that she would sign some ridiculous letter about supporting heterosexual marriage. I just can’t see Palin doing that. Time and again the Republicans ruin themselves by controlling what people do in their bedrooms. They want to use the state to impose their brand of morality. The contradiction is so obvious, Obama will probably win re-election. I encourage you all to read Sex at Dawn. It really has me questioning some of my own negative assumptions about sexuality.
It’s my understanding that the RT advocates claim a success rate of about 30%. Problem is, that figure, the highest they have dared to endorse, was the result of one survey, a telephone survey, consisting of a sample of 200 interviews of what was then current enrollees in an RT program. Sure, someone can emerge from the program, get married, have kids…. But that does not make you straight. If you still feel drawn to members of the same sex, it just means you are suppressing your feelings and desires.
I was living in San Diego when i was in my mid twenties. One night at one of the local pubs, I met this very hot guy from Atlanta. He was a doctor. He had just flown into town for a convention. Well, we went back to his hotel, he told me a bit more about his life, including the fact that he had a wife and kid back home. Due to the alcohol and flood of desires, things of course happened. But, the next morning, I felt disgusted with him for cheating on his wife and kid, and I felt disgusted with myself for participating. I never again knowingly did that again, and, very early on, broke off the relationship with the eventual Sonic-Mate because he was still living with his ex, which, to me, did not confirm that the ex was an ex. It all worked out, obviously – 15 year anniversary was Sunday – but I was true to my word that I would not mess with anyone who was married or in a relationship, even if the other person was supposedly cool with it.
I think most of us here know of a few men who followed that route to try and not be gay, and ended up cheating on the wife and family, and ultimately divorcing to end the lie.
SF – 15 year anniversary was Sunday Kudos to you and yours 🙂
A) LOVED the “Sonic-Mate” line….classic! 🙂
B) Your story is precisely the reason why I stopped getting involved with gay virgins, closet cases and other assorted “Curious Georges” a long time ago. Young and stupid is no way to go through life.
To echo Rusty, congrats on
putting upstaying with the same person 15 years, Sonic.Congratulations on your anniversary SF, and I wish you and Sonic-Mate many more happy years.
And Livewire, in a previous thread, you offered me similiar concrats, which I thank you for. And I am sorry I told to you to kiss my ass. I am still blaming jet lag. (and will continue to do so for as long as I can get away with it!) 😉
Sure, someone can emerge from the program, get married, have kids…. But that does not make you straight. If you still feel drawn to members of the same sex, it just means you are suppressing your feelings and desires.
So?
FYI, 30% is on the high end of the effectiveness range for drug and alcohol treatment and way higher than the treatment range for pedophiles, but I don’t hear medical and psychological groups squawking that this “proves” that these treatments are “ineffective”, nor do I hear them shrieking that it is “unethical” to offer them.
Why, it looks as if the rules are different for evaluating effectiveness when it comes to gays and lesbians. That’s interesting, because science is supposed to be unbiased, and yet it appears obvious that there is a double standard at work here.
Scherie @ #10:
Three immediate question groups pop into mind.
1.) Can this charge of Republicans controlling what people do in their bedrooms be substantiated with any evidence?
2.) Is it proper to use the state to keep people from privately molesting children in their bedrooms? Cannibalizing? Bestiality? Digging up bodies and keeping them for necrophilia? (My assumption is that these are all “no-brainer” points. What makes them different from homosexual activities which to my knowledge are completely ignored in all 50 states? Does the state have any latitude concerning people’s lust to fulfill internal desires?)
3.) How does regulated conduct weigh in against total license and libertine licentiousness? How do you draw the line? Does it involve the state?
Finally, why is “gay marriage” more noble and desired than 2000 years of tradition? You have read the book. Perhaps you give us a thumbnail of what Sex at Dawn would deliver in terms of a society that acts on its sexual desires without state interference. I most interested in where the guardrails come into play.
“Finally, why is “gay marriage” more noble and desired than 2000 years of tradition?” Try again. 2000 years of mostly polygamy and chattel “marriage” in no way supports “traditional marriage”. Your cherished “traditional marriage” is an entirely modern construct. Oh, and another tradition, that of comparing gays to rapists, necrophiles, and rapists of animals seems to still be in full swing. Wooo! let’s hear it for TRADITION!
#18
So is smiting straw men apparently…
@Dave
I know some times (most of the time, the voices say) tact isn’t my strong point. I again apologize for my words bringing up such pain.
As to ass kissing… sorry, you’re not my type 😉
NDT, how did treatment for homosexuality work for you? Was it a success or do you still battle same sex attraction?
Snob!!!!!!!! LOL!!! 😀
David, LOL, but you shouldn’t mess with Miss Rita Beads. . .
NDT, how did treatment for homosexuality work for you? Was it a success or do you still battle same sex attraction?
I wouldn’t know, David.
I’ve not sought it, nor have I ever had any interest in it. I’m happy with who I am and simply do not care enough for the values of, benefits of, or social acceptance that comes with opposite-sex relationships to go through the bother of it, and I’m quite all right with the consequences of that choice.
If other people choose to go through it, more power to them. If parents choose to put their children through it, that’s within their right to do so. The existence of that choice does not bother or threaten me in the least.
Frankly, I find that a gay person’s degree of self-loathing and personal insecurity is directly related to their vehemence against reparative therapy. It’s almost as if they have to demonize it as an excuse for their own inability to accept their own choice and responsibility for their behaviors.
2000 years of mostly polygamy and chattel “marriage” in no way supports “traditional marriage”.
Isn’t it entertaining how the only argument gay and lesbian people can make for gay marriage is to trash straight marriage and insist that all straight people are cheats and liars?
As one of my business mentors put it, the only way to sell an inferior product is to trash all the other options. The fact that gay and lesbian liberals like Brian Reno can offer no positive reasons for gay-sex marriage and instead have to trash opposite-sex marriage demonstrates quite nicely that a) there are no positive reasons and b) that gay-sex marriage is inferior.
Frankly, I find that a gay person’s degree of self-loathing and personal insecurity is directly related to their vehemence against reparative therapy. It’s almost as if they have to demonize it as an excuse for their own inability to accept their own choice and responsibility for their behaviors.
Mis Rita, (NDT) It is with deep sincerity that I extend the wish that someday you will be released of all that bitterness that seems to consumes you.
ndt, i’m actually anti-govt. involved MARRIAGE- gay or straight. and i’m the very farthest thing from a liberal! no govt involvement period. not their business who i’m with. don’t want or need “help”, “recognition” or “support” from the govt., just want them out of my relationship, hospital room, life.
Brian Reno, your understanding of the history of marriage is based on stories which emphasis the dark side of the institution. Polygamy was always an exception, generally reserved for the elite, particularly in the ancient Near East.
Alas that too many advocates of gay marriage focus on its darker aspects with downplaying (if not outright ignoring) is more noble ideals.
“trash straight marriage and insist that all straight people are cheats and liars?”
Didn’t do that. Not even implied. Your “traditional” marriage has yet to pass it’s century mark. Actual tradition IS in fact the chattel ownership of the wife (wives) and no amount of revisionist bs will change that. Modern marriage isn’t 2000 years old. It isn’t traditional. Two partners, rather than a master who must be obeyed and HIS wife or wives? not traditional at all.
I gotta disagree with ya, BDB. that’s historical marriage- a master and a subordinate.
NDT,
“I’ve not sought it, nor have I ever had any interest in it.”
And yet you seem very informed on the subject.
“If parents choose to put their children through it, that’s within their right to do so.”
As much as I hate the idea of parents doing that, I can’t argue they don’t have the right to do so.
“Frankly, I find that a gay person’s degree of self-loathing and personal insecurity is directly related to their vehemence against reparative therapy. It’s almost as if they have to demonize it as an excuse for their own inability to accept their own choice and responsibility for their behaviors.”
I don’t know any self-loathing gays so I don’t know if you are right about this or not.
I had been under the impression you are an ex-gay, about which I am apparently wrong. My apologies.
Your “traditional” marriage has yet to pass it’s century mark. Actual tradition IS in fact the chattel ownership of the wife (wives) and no amount of revisionist bs will change that.
So in other words, you’re acknowledging that traditional marriage is opposite-sex and that in fact gay-sex marriage such as you advocate has zero historical precedence or value.
It’s funny. One would think that gay-sex marriage supporters would be able to find in history an example of where societies esteemed and supported gay-sex marriage the same as opposite-sex. Even the Greeks and Romans made a very clear delineation in value between opposite-sex marriage, which held the highest esteem, and gay sex, which they saw as immature and undeveloped, suiting only base and primal needs.
Your screaming and whining about “chattel marriage” is merely feminist claptrap and button-pushing, trying to obfuscate the fact that marriage has been male-female, and for good reason, for literally millennia by trashing marriage.
Put up or shut up, Brian Reno. What value does gay-sex marriage bring to society? Why are gays like you so obsessed with trashing this institution which you are allegedly demanding?
I feel I must clarify, after a re-read of comments. My beef is with terminology- not with modern marriage. Modern marriage is a partnership between two equals, presently being described as “traditional”. It is not traditional, or historically representative of marriage. It is a good and fine institution, but ISN’T “traditional”. Traditional vows- Male= love, honor, cherish. Female= love, honor, OBEY. When’s the last wedding you heard those vows? Not ones modified to edit out the non-p.c. OBEY or edited to have both participants obey one another? lol! Ever hear of a divorce granted cos one spouse won’t obey orders? Traditional marriage is largely dead in western culture- we’ve replaced it with a fairer version. 2 equals.
Brian, what are your sources for that knowledge?
“……and I’m quite all right with the consequences of that choice.”
Wow NDT, you really chose, of your own free will, to be a gay-sex person? Dude, I’m really impressed.
BDB- i’ll get to ya in a min here. NDT- Please cite my advocation of gay marriage. Just cut ‘n paste it, i’ll wait. I’ll be waitin or an awfully long time tho since I DON”T advocate marriage @ all.
So we came from storks or cabbage patches, I suppose.
BDB- The vows, books written hundreds of years ago about how people should live, the judeochristian bible, the koran, shakespeare. off the top of my head. do you want titles and page numbers and such? it’ll take longer, but i got today off, and I’m goin nowhere but my air conditioned apt. 🙂
Well let’s go in order, shall we? Please cite where Helio “compares” gays to rapists, necrophiles etc.
TGC- that the only sentence you read in that?
OK! Here-
“2.) Is it proper to use the state to keep people from privately molesting children in their bedrooms? Cannibalizing? Bestiality? Digging up bodies and keeping them for necrophilia? (My assumption is that these are all “no-brainer” points. What makes them different from homosexual activities which to my knowledge are completely ignored in all 50 states? Does the state have any latitude concerning people’s lust to fulfill internal desires?)” Happy?
Helio brought that up all on his own.
So many people completely get/take this the wrong way.
The obey in wedding vows has zero to do with what we think of as “obey” now-a-days (like a child obeying your parents).
The original wedding vows, when they were written, the word obey had a little different definition (in the original latin), it meant “to listen deeply”.
Now, I believe that all of us should definitely “listen deeply” to our spouses no?
Come to think of it, the word “honor” is used in the exact same context, to listen to and heed your partners wishes.
The word honor in wedding vows has the same definition as the word obey originally had.
However, in today’s society we hear the word obey and we think “heck no, he don’t own me!”
a comment from
http://talkaboutmarriage.com/ladies-lounge/7689-marriage-vows-love-honor-obey-2.html
another comment – –
“No obey.” There is a record of a woman in 17th century Virginia who said that twice–“no obey” during her wedding. She was a wealthy widow remarrying. So after the 2nd time, the minister just repeated the vow, leaving out the obey part. And they were married.
Nope, I would never agree to it and we had the love, honor, and cherish part. I feel my husband never cherished me, though. I cherished him, hoping that modeling it would help. It didn’t. And I think the vow should end, “til love does depart.” Would make marriage a lot less scary.
Wow NDT, you really chose, of your own free will, to be a gay-sex person? Dude, I’m really impressed.
Comment by David in N.O. — July 19, 2011 @ 4:07 pm – July 19, 2011
I fail to see why. It was a decision based on what I felt most comfortable doing and what consequences I was most willing to accept, just like any other.
Rusty I am glad I clicked on that link because I though at first you were saying:
“….. “til love does depart.” Would make marriage a lot less scary.”
IMO, marriage should be “scary” i.e. serious enough to warrant the commitment it is.
As to the history of marriage, my appreciation is that it was a means to guarantee the legitimacy of children and rights of succession. In fact, I read those very words on a plaque in the Acropolis Museum in Athens just this past Saturday.
I’ll be waitin or an awfully long time tho since I DON”T advocate marriage @ all.
Not really.
It is a good and fine institution
Just a few seconds ago, actually. But of course, that was after you’d been trashing it and needed to backtrack.
ok- so he didn’t say, ‘gay are like….’ but if i bring up crocodiles everytime you talk about dogs, @ some point it’s obvious i think they are related and comparable.
why do i ‘need’ to backtrack? am i scared?
I totally agree with making decisions with a mind toward accepting responsibility for the consequences. Indeed, irresponsibility is, I believe, the root cause of many life’s problems.
But tell me NDT, were you born with an orientation toward same sex attraction or opposite sex attraction? Or something in between?
NDT wrote:
You missed the whole point… 30% is not true. it’s a lie.
Here is a critique of the study in question… And the critque is from one of the authors of that study! The APA refutes the treatment as effective. The Global Warming Priests did the same thing with a study that supposedly showed that 98 % of all scientists agree with the IPCC consensus! They skewed the survey, and threw out otherwise valid respondents in order to get the figure they wanted. The most important part is that they only got a number of 30% by lying and cheating and eliminating individuals in the survey that would bring the numbers down. No one has honestly ever come up with a success rate of higher than 10%, and that is probably being generous.
You may still condone parents taking their kids to this bogus treatment even at 10%. But would you still recommend it if the percentage of results that are negative, such as suicide, or lashing out and being even more promiscuous, or, even worse, turns the kids into flaming liberals, are much higher than 10%? Before you answer, consider that, unlike real medical facilities, where failures of treatments must be documented along with successes, these reparative therapists are governed by no such ethical inconvenience, which is why it is so hard to get real numbers on this stuff. This is the same ethical problem with alternative cancer treatment centers, especially those that operate in third world countries. They don’t report their failures.
PS. Nice that you equate being gay with being a pedophile, alcoholic, and drug user.
Brian Reno @ #41 and #42,
I went shopping for a bathroom remodel job and while I was away it appears that you have taken exception to my mention of child molesting, cannibalizing, bestiality and necrophilia on a site discussing gay life. I wrote and you reposted:
Allow me to explain. Necrophilia and gay sex are not the same. But, the state takes and active interest in one and not the other. If the state is to have NO interest in marriage, why should the state have any interest whatsoever in marrying a corpse, a dog, a child you bought in Thailand or a whole orphanage you feed, house, clothe and molest?
The issue is whether there is any possible interest in regulating marriage.
Obviously, you are incapable of drawing a line between homosexual marriage and cannibalizing homeless children.
That level of moral relativity is simply astounding.
However, if you can draw a bright line between screwing a corpse and gay marriage, perhaps you can share with us what code of morality informs you. After all, we can not rely upon the “common sense of Brian Reno” as our touchstone. You could be hit by a bus tomorrow and then where would we be?
I am curious about the concept that women throughout 1900 years were mere chattel. What book should I read to inform me?
Helio, I got one word, well actually three words for you. Grohe Rain Shower.
… And your link to Slate was kind of dumb. The very last sentence says this on the effectiveness of repression therapies for that group::
So, if repairative / repression therapies fails to work for pedophiles, for which there is almost unanimous agreement that this is damaging behavior to both the victim and perp, then why bother to try this failed regiment for something that is more or less accepted by a majority of people in the US? Especially if it’s more likely to do more harm than good?
No, Sonic, I hit the point directly, which is that no one calls other treatments that have a similar or lower rate “unethical” or “ineffective”.
Meanwhile both comparisons are apropos; pedophilia, alcoholism, and drug use are all things with a strong genetic component in which the only consistent remedy is to be abstinent. Please state, then, for the record, that because patients in these fail and have relapses more than they succed, that any and all drug and alcohol and pedophilia treatments are ineffective, unethical, and based on quack science.
And really….quoting the organization Truth Wins Out, which openly proclaims its antireligious bigotry and exists to advocate solely for Obama Party candidates?
Sonic, I’m surprised at you.
How is your relationship harmed by other people having sex with and marrying children?
Don’t you agree that it’s wrong to force people to suppress their true attractions and abstain from what they truly love?
Who are you to pass judgment on what other people do in their bedrooms, or enforce your moral values on others?
If you don’t support marrying or having sex with children, don’t marry or have sex with one. Your using governmental power to discriminate and enshrine your moral beliefs into law is a violation of equal protection for all.
/sarc
Something in between, Dave, as in truth, we all were.
Um, no I don’t believe that NDT. The “we all were” part that is. Perhaps some people were, perhaps you were. I don’t see how you aver this is “truth”, but ok.
I am put in mind of three friends we saw a couple of weeks ago, two from Kuwait, one from Saudi Arabia. I wish I had thought to ask them how they they made their choice, I mean considering the obvious downside of choosing homosexuality in their native countries, where they still live. Maybe there is something to the old Kinsey 1 to 6 scale. Who knows?
The drug and alcohol treatments have a much HIGHER rate of success than 10%. Pedophiles who get that treatment… are in prison or on parole for the offense. What do you suggest we do? I would not be opposed to ending that therapy if it doesn’t work anyway.
First, I didn’t “quote” them. That happened to be the first link I found. This is not the first time I’ve seen that study debunked. Brian Dunning also destroyed it on a recent science / skeptic podcast. The APA also debunks it. That said, I will quote someone IF they prove to be accurate, which, in this case, they are.
And you sidestepped my question:
This is kind of like the Kyoto crowd. There is no estimates that show that worldwide acceptance of the thing would do any good, that it would only forestall the 1 degree rise in temp for five to seven years.
It would work!
Yet, they still blindly support it, because… well… it’s better than nothing. And, like you on failed gay reparative therapy, they are more than willing to completely ignore how many lives their policies will destroy.
Oops/// that was supposed to be “It WOULDN’T work!!!”.
David in N.O.: Thanks, much. I will check it out.
Bandying the percentage of success back and forth has me thinking…
What is an acceptable success rate? And is there a sucess rate where complaints would fade about someone offering the process?
And, while I’m not gay (just throwing that out there), I am left handed. For years, people were trying to ‘fix’ lefties. My father’s an example of that. So, choice of bed partners aside, I’ve still a dog in the fight.
“What is an acceptable success rate? And is there a sucess rate where complaints would fade about someone offering the process?”
Interesting question, LW. I think the answer would be predicated on one’s posture regarding homosexuality. Consider your example of left handedness; in a world where lefties are thought wrong, I expect a lower success rate would be acceptable. And vice versa. Maybe.
It seems that groups like Exodus et.,al. are retreating from representing themselves as offering cures or conversion, and are finally admitting that same sex attraction probably won’t go away. I recall reading that now they are using phrases such as “helping people cope with unwanted same sex attraction”, which is fine by me.
I have a cousin who many years ago embraced a religion that, like most, held homosexuality as incompatible with it’s theology. He is a lot like Randy, who posted on another thread. He is celibate, but admits to still being attracted to other men evev after 20+ years. I am glad we are still close
Continued… we are still close. He made this decision as an adult and I supported him completely. Celibacy has worked for him. I believe that for people like Randy and my cousin that this is good as it gets. I believe sexual orientation is what it is and does not change. Like left handedness.
The figure that we’re dancing around… is the failure rate. If the success rate is only 10%, then, if the goal is to change “gayness”, the failure rate is 90%. Would anyone here take a drug that has that failure rate, yet also has known side effects of severe depression, extreme anguish, suicide, and the advancement of liberal tendencies???
The last bit is a joke, but you get my point.
The drug and alcohol treatments have a much HIGHER rate of success than 10%.
Nope.
Approximately 90% of alcoholics experience at least one relapse in the four years following treatment. Similar relapse rates occur for recovering smokers and heroin addicts, suggesting that many addictive behaviors may share the same behavioral, biochemical, and cognitive components.
Not to mention the well-documented links to depression, suicide, and extreme anguish found among those in rehab and those relapsing.
Yet again, I don’t see a single psychiatrist, psychologist, or association thereof insisting that this proves that treatment programs are failures, quack science, unethical, etc. Nor do I see there being a demand for society to rewrite laws that have a disparate impact on alcoholics and drug addicts, or a surge in calling people who don’t accept this behavior “bigots”.
Pedophiles who get that treatment… are in prison or on parole for the offense. What do you suggest we do?
Well, since you state that therapy doesn’t work, then it’s a violation of equal protection for you not to allow pedophiles to have sex with and marry those to whom they’re sexually attracted, and you should thus decriminalize it. After all, you still haven’t explained how allowing pedophiles to have sex with and marry children will negatively affect your relationship.
Interesting discussion. I agree with Dan and others who question the effectiveness of “reparative” “therapy.” If the success (meaning the person is able to change their sexuality) was as high as 10%, then it might be worth a try for those who seek to change their sexuality. If “success” is convincing the gay people who enter that homosexuality is naughty, and to become celibate or become “straight” by enabling them to marry someone of the opposite sex, but still having predominant attraction towards the same sex, then it could be 10% or even as high as one-third.
The big difference I see between “reparative” “therapy” and therapy for alcoholism or other addictions is that alcoholism is unhealthy and usually leads to other problems, including early death. The same is not true for homosexuality. “Reparative” “therapy” is as unnecessary as it is for a person who enjoys alcohol in a responsible manner. There is no need for such a person to enter an alcohol rehabilitation program.
If an adult wants to try “reparative” “therapy,” he obviously should be free to do so. But they should know that “reparative” “therapists” may have their own agenda. It seems to me that any qualified therapist should first focus why the patient is unhappy with being gay. I would have more respect with “reparative” “therapy” patients were counselled that homosexuality is not sinful, that many people leave happy and productive lives as homosexuals, and question if, perhaps the ones in their lives who are condemning their homosexuality are the ones that need therapy. Then after such an analysis, if the patient still wants to try to change, then go for it, but still let them know that real success is extremely rare, if at all, existent.
As for parents coercing their children, that’s a tough one. IMO, parents who send a child to “reparative” “therapy” are probably ignorant, and not realizing what they are doing to their child. They may not know (or care) that what David has described can happen to their child. Anyway, we allow parents to decide what’s best for their children, but, obviously, there are limits to this.
Ah.. but after a relapse or two, many of those tend to stop! I know more than a few self admitted alcoholics. This includes my Mom, who has been in AA for almost 50 years. I basically grew up with the program, went to Alateen meeting (more on that in a bit), and have seen some of her friends succeed, and fail. I can only think of a few out of that group who, once they got through the first couple of years, failed to get on a path of sobriety. Of the relapses, most are pretty damned honest about it. It’s part of the process of admitting your failures and limitations.
As a practicing musician, 25 years worth, I have seen MORE than my fair share of alcoholics and drug abusers, some who have gotten sober, many who needed to and either didn’t try, or failed, or, have died as a direct result of drinking or drug abuse. I know a few who would have been considered an alcoholic in the classic sense when they were young, but, as they got older, dialed down the drinking and partying and have a sip of wine at dinner and that’s about it.
There is a HUGE difference between being an alcoholic and being gay. The abuse of alcohol tends to destroy your life, your career, and eventually, your health. Being gay, in of itself? I can’t think of anybody who has lost their job from abusing, drinking or snorting too much gay! Being too gay cannot kill you (depending on where you live of course) – taking too many pill or drinking too much Everclear can / will. I do know of friends who have been rejected by family members simply for being gay. But there is a big difference between that and family members turning away alcoholics. They don’t turn away the alcoholic due to the fact that the person is simply an alcoholic… they do it because the persons behavior has become completely unmanageable, the person has become too much of a burden and hazard to continue the relationship.
The big difference here is that treating alcoholism is valid because, if it progresses with out a check or balance, it does destroy your life. Simply BEING gay does not. Yet, reparative therapy promises just that, not just to curb self destructive promiscuous behavior, but to “cure” you of your gay. .
So, NDT, that said, I have two questions:
Have you now changed your position on the concept of sex addiction, as there are reparative therapy groups for that too….
And
Since you have no problem with solutions that only have at most a dubious 10% success rate, despite the harm that it may cause, then will you agree that pedophiles and gays should continue to become priests, because, after all, many of them do / did that to try and cure their affliction, and that probably worked at least 10% of the time.
Since you have no problem with solutions that only have at most a dubious 10% success rate, despite the harm that it may cause, then will you agree that pedophiles and gays should continue to become priests, because, after all, many of them do / did that to try and cure their affliction, and that probably worked at least 10% of the time.
Two ways to look at that, Sonic.
First, Sonic, despite the high rate of relapses, alcoholics and drug abusers are still allowed to become or remain airline pilots, air traffic controllers, and city bus drivers. Do you have a problem with that?
Second, your qualification when claiming that reparative therapy doesn’t work was to point to ANY instances of relapse or attraction as proof of complete failure, quack science, etc.
By your own admittance, then, drug and alcohol rehabilitation are complete failures, since you acknowledge that people a) relapse and b) still have “attractions” to use drugs or to drink.
Meanwhile, what do you care if people choose to drink to excess or use drugs? How does that negatively affect your life or your relationship?
And before you start going “their behavior is a danger to public health”, be prepared for what you’re immediately going to get hit with next.
In short, the basic problem here is the double standard gays and lesbians have towards reparative therapy, created out of antireligious bigotry and also the insecurity and immaturity to accept responsibility for their own decisions and the consequences thereof.
That’s totally irrelevant to this discussion. But I’ll answer anyway. First, a relapse is not necessarily a complete re-immersion into the bing behavior of the past. Second, there is such a thing as a “functioning” alcoholic / drug abuser, where the drinking / drug abuse does not affect the persons job. If there is no evidence that the pilot / driver / what-ever has had no problem with their job in the past, then I have no problem with that.
No. You are just wrong. A relapse can mean going back to the destructive life of alcohol / drug abuse that you tried to leave behind. OR, it can mean one drink or one drunken night. That is actually expected in the journey to recovery. Again, you never get to a point where you are no longer an alcoholic… Where you are cured! They don’t “cure”you… and never claim to!!! You are always an alcoholic. You always have those desires. With gay reparative therapy, they try to convince you that you are no longer gay.
As an aside. It’s law that these people be tested. But it’s yet another invasion of privacy mandated by the nanny state. I loved it that Congress passed the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 (more Conservative “small government” policy) and conveniently excluded themselves from having to submit to the policy.
Have to go to dinner. Will finish later. Unless I get too drunk on gay and my life falls apart.