Psychologists Repudiate Gay-to-Straight Therapy

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]Gregus wrote:
Im sure the pendulum is NOT all the way in either direction. Some are born gay and function fine, others could not. Why deny even the possibility of help and discussion for SOME to be electivly treated or helped? [/quote]

First post, from the APA: [quote]
No solid evidence exists that such change is likely, says the report, and some research suggests that efforts to produce change could be harmful, inducing depression and suicidal tendencies.
[/quote]

Treated or helped? Certainly. Told that the impossible is possible? harmful, inducing depression and suicidal tendencies.

That’s their expert opinion. You’re welcome to disagree.

82

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
They changed their minds in 1973, they changed their minds with the new guidelines, they’ll change their minds again.[/quote]

In 1973, the APA evaluated the limited research that had been conducted to that point and determined that there was insufficient support for categorizing homosexuality as a mental illness. In the ensuing 36 years, an enormous amount of research by the major medical and mental health organizations has confirmed this decision, and the APA stands by it.

We now know that reparative therapy does not change people’s orientation, and that it doubles the risk of suicidal thoughts, drug/alcohol abuse, anxiety, and depression. That’s a pretty good reason NOT to continue it, and it would be irresponsible for the medical and mental health organizations to promote it.

This is the tired canard pushed by anti-gay lobbies, but it fails to account for the fact that EVERY MAJOR MEDICAL, MENTAL HEALTH, AND EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION HAS CONDUCTED RESEARCH FOR 40 YEARS, AND UNANIMOUSLY AGREES WITH THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE APA. If you’re going to dismiss the APA as being so politically corrupt that their conclusions on homosexuality are worthless, you have to apply the same ridiculous criticism to every one of these other organizations. Are you really going to go there?

You’re insinuating a perfect correlation (homosexuality/sexual irresponsibility) that does not exist in reality. You fail to account for gay relationships that are in fact healthy, nor do you apply the same criticisms to heterosexual relationships that are not, by your “standards”, healthy.

Are you going to make it illegal for heteros that practice anal sex to get married? How about lesbians who don’t practice anal sex at all?

I have many gay friends that are similarly in commmitted long term monogamous relationships, despite the histrionic stereotypes pushed by the anti-gay lobbies. If people want to stay single and practice irresponsible sex, that is their choice whether they are gay or straight…I’m talking about committed gay couples that want to marry and spend their lives together. Why would you deny them (us) the right to marry?

83

[quote]lucasa wrote:
Just being homosexual can induce depression and suicidal tendencies. [/quote]

Hmmm, you think the fact that people condemn, demonize, and ridicule gays may have something to do with that?

84

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I win, because I don’t care to argue for my way of life. I am too busy living it. I don’t answer to anyone, nor do I care about what others think. While in my house and while going about my business, it is my business, and am not in need of the acceptance of others. [/quote]

You’re allowed to marry the person you love. I’m not.

85

[quote]anonym wrote:
But I don’t see forlife apologizing for his lifestyle, either, and I think he only cares about the opinions of others so much as they directly influence his life (for example, he can’t marry the person he wishes to because others do not accept him).

Making himself, and the people he loves, happy is, in at least some way, dependent upon how others think.

That being said, I agree. I don’t have quite the “I don’t give a fuck” outlook as you seem to, but I do let most things roll off my back.[/quote]

Exactly. If I cared what other people thought, I would insist on the term “marriage” and require all religions to teach their flock the facts about sexual orientation.

People can believe whatever they want to believe, as long as they don’t try to force their beliefs on me. When they start legislating their fairy tales into laws that do affect me, that is when I start caring about what they believe.

86

[quote]kodiak82 wrote:
Islam is number one. in sharia law , homosexuality carries the death penalty. Other religions my condemn it and be intolerant of it , but they don’t order your death. what gets me, is all these gay groups attack christianity, but the never ever mutter a word about how Islamic countries treat gays. Iran has executed a lot of gay people. look it up[/quote]

Jews used to kill gay people too. They just became more civilized once Jesus hit the scene.

87

[quote]tom63 wrote:
Not being able to be married is not discrimination, it’s a blessing, ask any married guy. Hell, I would support gay rights 100% if I saw any gay responsibility. Which I don’t. In 1991 at Boston’s gay pride parade, you had 20,000 complaining homos complaining about alack of AIDS funding, with no talk of AIDS responsibility.

It’s really easy to not get AIDS. I’ve avoided it as a heterosexual for 20+ years. Again, give me rights, but don’t require me to be responsible.[/quote]

Deny gays the legal institution that will promote sexual responsibility, because they’re not responsible enough yet. Brilliant.

Why do so many people base their opinions on gay pride parades, while ignoring the average gay couple living in the average neighborhood paying the same average price for their kid’s braces as everyone else?

88

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
marriage is something that by definition is a union before God in a holy place between a man and a woman.
Those who are very religious feel as though the homosexuals are putting their nose into the religious people’s business.[/quote]

So atheists should not be allowed to marry?

89

[quote]Gregus wrote:
He researches it because he is conflicted about himself and seeks to understand himself better.[/quote]

Ya think maybe I discuss it because I would like to have equal rights with my partner?

Because, as noted in the original post, reparative therapy does NOT change a person’s sexual orientation and can be damaging. If someone has a deep religious conviction that being gay is wrong, the best you can do is help them live a celibate life or encourage them to consider a religion that will accept their sexual orientation. If you sell snakeoil solutions promising to turn them straight, you will only hurt them in the long run.

90

[quote]forlife wrote:
MaximusB wrote:
I win, because I don’t care to argue for my way of life. I am too busy living it. I don’t answer to anyone, nor do I care about what others think. While in my house and while going about my business, it is my business, and am not in need of the acceptance of others.

You’re allowed to marry the person you love. I’m not.[/quote]

My happiness is not based on my ability to marry anyone. While I can understand your frustration, have you thought of getting Canada married until something changes here?

91

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
My happiness is not based on my ability to marry anyone. While I can understand your frustration, have you thought of getting Canada married until something changes here?[/quote]

Your happiness may not be enhanced by marriage, but it’s important to us. We love each other, are committed to each other, and want to get married. Having the legal responsibilities/benefits of marriage would provide additional stability, which is in the best interest of us, our kids, and I would argue in the best interest of society as well.

People shouldn’t be forced to move to another country in order to have equal rights. If we were to move to Canada, for example, I wouldn’t be able to spend nearly as much time with my kids as I do now.

92

Now you’re just tying yourself in knots. So in 1973, the APA “evaluated the limited research” and made this conclusion? Based on limited research? Huh. I wonder what else drove them to “evaluate” the “limited” research? Was it also the gay protests of the APA’s positions?

Great, so does contracting HIV from homosexual behavior. So does homosexual promiscuity. Time to get another standard.

So it never happened? You better tell that to practically everyone who thinks otherwise:

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+APA+decision+December+1973:+declassification+of+homosexuality+as…-a094598255

Great argument forlife. You really addressed the thrust of what I was trying to say there.

Here’s what I think, forlife, and you can take it or leave it. The APA can best help people like you by helping them to find psychologists to deal with their obvious anger issues. Even if gay “marriage” were legalized tomorrow, you’d still be on here complaining about heterosexual (white) males, just by virtue of the fact that we’re still in existence. I’m sorry that you got pushed to marry a woman by some mormon priests (or whatever you call them). I’m sorry everyone everywhere doesn’t affirm your lifestyle (actually, I’m not sorry). But the fact of the matter is that your responses to your past and present issues are YOUR RESPONSIBILITY, not everyone else’s. Tell that to your other militant gay buddies. It’s not our fault you guys play Russian roulette with HIV. It’s not our fault you engage in other at-risk behaviors. And we’re not changing our views on gay “marriage” or homosexuality. The only thing you can affect is your behavior and outlook. And bashing everyone else who doesn’t agree with you (which is either a majority or a huge minority) is a very, very unwise thing for such a small percentage of the population to do, especially since the rest of us are expected to fund HIV research and pay for the drug cocktails consumed by your community.

There do appear to be well-adjusted homosexuals out there. You are not one.

93

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
In 1973, the APA evaluated the limited research that had been conducted to that point and determined that there was insufficient support for categorizing homosexuality as a mental illness. In the ensuing 36 years, an enormous amount of research by the major medical and mental health organizations has confirmed this decision, and the APA stands by it.

Now you’re just tying yourself in knots. So in 1973, the APA “evaluated the limited research” and made this conclusion? Based on limited research? Huh. I wonder what else drove them to “evaluate” the “limited” research? Was it also the gay protests of the APA’s positions?

We now know that reparative therapy does not change people’s orientation, and that it doubles the risk of suicidal thoughts, drug/alcohol abuse, anxiety, and depression. That’s a pretty good reason NOT to continue it, and it would be irresponsible for the medical and mental health organizations to promote it.

Great, so does contracting HIV from homosexual behavior. So does homosexual promiscuity. Time to get another standard.

This is the tired canard pushed by anti-gay lobbies,

So it never happened? You better tell that to practically everyone who thinks otherwise:
In 1970, Kameny convinced the Gay Activists Alliance to join him in his campaign to overturn the APA’s policy, and only three years later they were successful.
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+APA+decision+December+1973:+declassification+of+homosexuality+as…-a094598255

but it fails to account for the fact that EVERY MAJOR MEDICAL, MENTAL HEALTH, AND EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION HAS CONDUCTED RESEARCH FOR 40 YEARS, AND UNANIMOUSLY AGREES WITH THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE APA. If you’re going to dismiss the APA as being so politically corrupt that their conclusions on homosexuality are worthless, you have to apply the same ridiculous criticism to every one of these other organizations. Are you really going to go there?

What percentage of psychologists are actually members of the APA? What percentage of doctors are members of the AMA? I know the answer to the latter is “a very small number.” A lot of doctors DO believe the AMA is corrupt. I know doctors myself who refuse to join California’s version of it. Basically, they’re political organizations. Why do you keep saying “every major medical organization…” ad nauseam? Do you just have that statement saved in a .doc file somewhere so that you can just copy and paste it whenever you’ve run out of things to say? Do your Orwellian thinking patterns really leave you with so little original material after your doublethink is exhausted?

You’re insinuating a perfect correlation (homosexuality/sexual irresponsibility) that does not exist in reality. You fail to account for gay relationships that are in fact healthy, nor do you apply the same criticisms to heterosexual relationships that are not, by your “standards”, healthy.

But I NEVER SAID A PERFECT CORRELATION EXISTED! I said that the correlation is very high. And it is. And you know it.

Are you going to make it illegal for heteros that practice anal sex to get married? How about lesbians who don’t practice anal sex at all?

Great argument forlife. You really addressed the thrust of what I was trying to say there.

I have many gay friends that are similarly in commmitted long term monogamous relationships, despite the histrionic stereotypes pushed by the anti-gay lobbies. If people want to stay single and practice irresponsible sex, that is their choice whether they are gay or straight…I’m talking about committed gay couples that want to marry and spend their lives together. Why would you deny them (us) the right to marry?

Here’s what I think, forlife, and you can take it or leave it. The APA can best help people like you by helping them to find psychologists to deal with their obvious anger issues. Even if gay “marriage” were legalized tomorrow, you’d still be on here complaining about heterosexual (white) males, just by virtue of the fact that we’re still in existence. I’m sorry that you got pushed to marry a woman by some mormon priests (or whatever you call them). I’m sorry everyone everywhere doesn’t affirm your lifestyle (actually, I’m not sorry). But the fact of the matter is that your responses to your past and present issues are YOUR RESPONSIBILITY, not everyone else’s. Tell that to your other militant gay buddies. It’s not our fault you guys play Russian roulette with HIV. It’s not our fault you engage in other at-risk behaviors. And we’re not changing our views on gay “marriage” or homosexuality. The only thing you can affect is your behavior and outlook. And bashing everyone else who doesn’t agree with you (which is either a majority or a huge minority) is a very, very unwise thing for such a small percentage of the population to do, especially since the rest of us are expected to fund HIV research and pay for the drug cocktails consumed by your community.

There do appear to be well-adjusted homosexuals out there. You are not one. [/quote]

Very well said, I agree.

94

Lol. Once I have equal rights, I’ll happily take my place in society as an equal citizen.

There do appear to be well-adjusted believers out there. You are not one.

95

[quote]forlife wrote:
Lol. Once I have equal rights, I’ll happily take my place in society as an equal citizen.

[/quote]

No, you won’t. You’ll be on here the very next day yammering on about how gays make less money, gays are “discriminated against” in the workforce, gays have more depression, gays have more HIV, and a whole laundry list of other demands on the agenda. You’ll just find some new object upon which to project your issues. I’ve heard you complaining about all of these things in the past. No one here is operating under the illusion that marriage is the final thing people like you need from society to be happy.

96

P.S. You still haven’t answered my question:

Do you seriously want people to believe that every major medical and mental health organization is SO POLITICALLY BIASED that, without exception, their conclusions based on 47 years of research are worthless?

You dissed the American Medical Association. Are you going to diss the American Academy of Pediatrics, National Association of Social Workers, Surgeon General, etc.? Are they all so professionally corrupt and irresponsible that their conclusions on homosexuality can safely be ignored?

What a crock.

97

[quote]forlife wrote:
P.S. You still haven’t answered my question:

Do you seriously want people to believe that every major medical and mental health organization is SO POLITICALLY BIASED that, without exception, their conclusions based on 47 years of research are worthless?

You dissed the American Medical Association. Are you going to diss the American Academy of Pediatrics, National Association of Social Workers, Surgeon General, etc.? Are they all so professionally corrupt and irresponsible that their conclusions on homosexuality can safely be ignored?

[/quote]

Actually, I’m trying to see if I can get you to post “every major medical and mental health … 47 years” a record number of times.

98

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
No, you won’t. You’ll be on here the very next day yammering on about how gays make less money, gays are “discriminated against” in the workforce, gays have more depression, gays have more HIV, and a whole laundry list of other demands on the agenda. You’ll just find some new object upon which to project your issues. I’ve heard you complaining about all of these things in the past. No one here is operating under the illusion that marriage is the final thing people like you need from society to be happy. [/quote]

I’m only interested in equality on the legislative level, marriage being the most important, but not the only issue. Like I said earlier, you can tell yourself whatever you like in order to feel superior to the evil gays. I couldn’t fucking care what you think about us, as long as I have civil equality.

99

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Actually, I’m trying to see if I can get you to post “every major medical and mental health … 47 years” a record number of times. [/quote]

Because god forbid you address the actual point. Your entire argument depends on making others believe that the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychiatric Association, Surgeon General, etc. are ALL so politically biased, without exception, that their conclusions on homosexuality are worthless.

Good luck with that.

100

[quote]forlife wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
No, you won’t. You’ll be on here the very next day yammering on about how gays make less money, gays are “discriminated against” in the workforce, gays have more depression, gays have more HIV, and a whole laundry list of other demands on the agenda. You’ll just find some new object upon which to project your issues. I’ve heard you complaining about all of these things in the past. No one here is operating under the illusion that marriage is the final thing people like you need from society to be happy.

I’m only interested in equality on the legislative level, marriage being the most important, but not the only issue.[/quote]

Right, exactly. Once you’re done with marriage, you’ll still have the same issues that you’ll need to project onto the next cause du jure.

Feel superior? Hardly. I think it’s the other way around, if anything. I think I speak for the rest of the straights when I say that we simply want to be left alone. We’re tired of hearing about “The Agenda.”

you mean, “civil equality and…,” right? I mean, you obviously DO care about what we think because you’re always on here trying to get us to change our minds about the way you live. The way to stop caring what we think is to stop caring what we think. Running around yelling at everyone for how bad they suck b/c they don’t agree with you is not the way for you to move on.