Homosexuals are a disease, but luckily they've found the cure!

[Mystech]

I'm probably posting this just a little too soon, but I've just been pointed to an organization by the name of NARTH. This is a group of supposed intellectuals who treat homosexuality as a mental disorder and try to develop "sexual reorientation therapy" in order the "cure" homosexuals.

I don't have a very intelligent rebuttal to anything presented on this website just yet, as at the moment I've only skimmed it, but already I feel the urge to bring the topic here to see what all of you think.

Initially I'm reminded of the character "Striker" from the x-men movie who was upset because Professor Xavier couldn't cure his son of being a mutant . Also, as they give an address for their headquarters on the site, and it's only a few hours drive from me, I am tempted to grab a box of condoms and go cure some hets of their own sexual dysfunction, if you get my meaning.

Expect more posts with less rage and more thought out opinions and arguments from me, later. I just wanted to get the ball rolling early on and see what all of you think about the idea of "sexual reorientation therapy".

 

[EI_Sparks]

They had a similar practise in Irish schools for many years - if you were left-handed, they beat you until you wrote with your right hand.
Nowadays, we call it child abuse.
Something similar should apply to this place.

 

[EvilPoet]

NARTH appears to be a little behind on medical stuff. This
is from the APA (The American Psychological Association)

Is Sexual Orientation a Choice?

No, human beings can not choose to be either gay or straight. Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.


Can Therapy Change Sexual Orientation?

No. Even though most homosexuals live successful, happy lives, some homosexual or bisexual people may seek to change their sexual orientation through therapy, sometimes pressured by the influence of family members or religious groups to try and do so. The reality is that homosexuality is not an illness. It does not require treatment and is not changeable.

However, not all gay, lesbian, and bisexual people who seek assistance from a mental health professional want to change their sexual orientation. Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people may seek psychological help with the coming out process or for strategies to deal with prejudice, but most go into therapy for the same reasons and life issues that bring straight people to mental health professionals.

 

[Vertigoll]

It's all social normalities. Homophobia is the leading problem of this sort within our society. The genetic differentiations between people are natural. Not all people are alike, some are black, others white. Some have brown hair, some blonde. Some enjoy the presence of the opposite sex and other prefer the same sex. I do not propose I feel completely comfortable around homosexuals, because they are undeniably different and in some ways alienated from normal society because of the so called "disorder" which they have. Although, if you can learn to accept them for what they are and who they like, all of this therapy nonsense will be out the window. This isn't to say you need to like them, it only means you need to understand that some people are different.

We won the war against racism, let's go to the final leap and unify everybody. To much? Fine, let's try anyway.

 

[Increan]

Ok here's a thought, what if there is someone who is homosexual, but they want to be straight. They don't like the idea of being attracted to the same sex and wished they could be straight. Would you think it would be ok then to have the reorientation centers?

 

[one_raven]

But I'm a Cheerleader!!

 

[one_raven]

It was funny as a movie.

It is truly sad as a reality.

 

[Mystech]

Originally posted by Increan
Ok here's a thought, what if there is someone who is homosexual, but they want to be straight. They don't like the idea of being attracted to the same sex and wished they could be straight. Would you think it would be ok then to have the reorientation centers?

I'm not sure I understand the motivation here. What makes this person not like the idea of being attracted to the same sex? What makes him think that being attracted to the opposite sex would be something that he should strive for? It's a pretty messy conflict, the only thing I could really think of to account for such a mind set is prior conditioning against homosexuality, be it religious or what have you.

If you're not sure why I find this so odd, try to imagine a heterosexual who's ashamed of his own sexuality and really thinks that being a homosexual would be better for him. Doesn't make a hell of a lot of sence, does it?

I really can't think of anything that would guide someone to seek this, sure being a homosexual is kind of a raw deal most of the time, but that doesn't make one's heart any less compelled to find companionship, and it doesn't change one's taste in partners. I really can't imagine any healthy motivation for wanting to change one's own sexual orientation.

 

[Mystech]

Fifty years ago, researcher C.D. King offered a very useful definition of "normal." The practical wisdom of that definition is still apparent. Normality, he said, is "that which functions according to its design."

As clinicians, we have witnessed the intense suffering caused by homosexuality, which many of our members see as a "failure to function according to design."

http://www.narth.com/menus/statement.html

Hmm, strange that the members of NARTH claim to be intellectuals who are trying to treat homosexual from a scientific stand point as if it were a dysfunction, yet for some reason they insist on assuming intelligent design of the human being? So, a man was then designed to have sex with a woman, and as such homosexuality is abnormal and wrong? That takes a few leaps of faith in thinking, if you ask me.

What criteria are they using to determine that a man was designed to have sex with a woman? The fact that this is what produces offspring? Is reproduction man's highest goal, or is it just that biological reproduction is a cycle and as such we just end up with a world mostly full of those who strive for it? Why can't the purpose of our various bits be for expressing love, or for carnal pleasure? A man's bits fit very easily into those of another, hehe, and a woman can pleasure another woman better than a man can, or so some say. Who's job is it to divine what a human beings purpose of design is? Personally, as a being with free will, I'd like very much to think that my purpose is my own to determine, and it is sad that I can't reproduce biologically (though if cloning really takes off in the next few years, who knows, heh), but that won't stop me from being able to leave a lasting impression, or find love in my life.

Homosexuality distorts the natural bond of friendship that would naturally unite persons of the same sex. It threatens the continuity of traditional male-female marriage--a bond which is naturally anchored by the complementarity of the sexes, and has long been considered essential for the protection of children.

Well, if by this they intend to display that homosexuals aren't safe to be around children, or that they aren't homosexual couples can't raise children, I'd have to just cock my head and give them that "what the hell are you talking about" look. There's nothing to show that homosexual parents are in any way worse than the normal heterosexual family unit. Anyone who wants to second guess me is free to look up some statistics about adopted homosexual parrents, and flaunt them in my face, but I've honestly never heard that homosexual parrents are all bad parrents.

In males, homosexuality it is associated with poor relationship with father; difficulty individuating from mother; a sense of masculine deficit; and a persistent belief of having been different from, and misunderstood by, same-sex childhood peers. In adulthood we also see a persistent pattern of maladaptive behaviors and a documented higher level of psychiatric complaints.

Well this is just utter crap. Homosexuality in men is caused by a bad relationship with the father? I love my dad! A sense of masculine deficit? So I like guys because I feel like I'm a sissy? Thinking of a number of guys that I know (gay guys) versus some straight guys I know, I'd have to say that I know a lot of gay guys that are more masculine than most straight guys. . . bearded gut havin' gun totin' truck drivin' steak eatin' fags. You may not see 'em on Will and Grace, and you probably don't see 'em walking down the street wearing pink shirts, but that's just because they blend in so well that you'd never associate them with the stereotypical homosexual. This is just outright observer error. As for a higher level of psychiatric complaints, I'd either have to say that their own observations must be skewed being that they are a group who specifically tries to listen too homosexuals with psychiatric complaints, or point to the various other stressors which oppressed minorities (of any kind) go through, which could certainly make them more likely to have problems that they would seek out professional help for. Lets sick religious wackos and right wing conservatives on you, trying to beat you down with signs that say "AIDS CURES FAGS" all while you try to lie every day to your friends and loved ones so that you don't have to deal with their possible reactions to who you love, and see if every damn day of your life is bright and shiny. Even normal people can display psychosis under extreme circumstances, and I really think that it stands to reason that homosexuals would be depressed more often than your average heterosexual white male, as would anyone in such positions. I'm sure that African Americans in the 50s and 60s were also being so uppity just because they're inherently more sassy and annoying, too, by the way.

 

[Mystech]

Today, children from kindergarten through college are being taught that homosexuality is a normal, healthy lifestyle option with no disadvantages other than society's disapproval.

Well that's a pretty broad statement and sure as hell isn't true everywhere, here in Arizona for example there are specific laws which prohibit teaching about homosexuality in this way (in fact teaching about it in any way which my suggest that it may be ok for some people to be homosexuals ) so I think they are overstepping their boundaries a bit here by claiming that this happens everywhere.

It is NARTH's aim to provide a different perspective. Particularly, we want to clarify that homosexuality is not "inborn," and that gays are not "a people," in the same sense that an ethnic group is "a people"--but instead, they are (like all of us) simply individuals who exhibit particular patterns of feelings and behavior.

Umm, ok I'll admit that homosexuals are a bit different from an ethnic group in a few ways, but look at the description they give of what homosexuals are. . . doesn't that make them a group, too? I'm just not sure what the hell they are trying to get at here.

When gay advocates reframed the public debate as a discussion about "who one is" rather than "what one does," they successfully intimidated dissenters by casting them as personally bigoted and hateful. As a result, most people who defend the reality of male-female design have been embarrassed into public silence.

Ok, so here they'd have us believe that homosexuality is a behavior without internal motivation (Ummm what?!) and they bring up the intelligent design idea again, and ad to it this time a mystic higher purpose (apparently that of reproduction? At very least engaging in a standard heterosexual relationship) and give no reasoning as to WHY it is that this is better. Sound like a bunch of heterosexists to me. Heterosexual supermen are our superiors!

 

[CounslerCoffee]

Is Sexual Orientation a Choice?
No, human beings can not choose to be either gay or straight. Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.

So does this apply to pedophiles? Because most doctors agree that pedos are the result of being a screwed up kid. So being a pedo is basically the result of a bad childhood, but it's not genetics? So being gay is basically genetics and not being screwed up? I don't get it. If your genetically gay, then can't you be a genetic pedo? Or could you be a genetic beastiality person?

This is more or less something for the genetics forum. Im just curious as to why its genetics when you want to have a same sex relationship, but your screwed up when you want to have sex with a kid or an animal. If sex is all genetics, then wouldn't certain people be born Just screwed up?

 

[Mystech]

Well regardless of what causes homosexuality, I don't see how you can make an argument for it being akin to pedophilia or bestiality. In both of those instances people are seeking non-consensual sex, and also not a relationship with their chosen partner (hah, though weather or not this would even be better or worse isn't really easy to say ). If you're trying to make an argument that we should either accept both of these things on the same grounds that we should accept homosexuality, or that we should condemn homosexuality on the same grounds that we condemn these things, then I'd have to remind you that causality really isn't the main issue here, you just can't put these two things in the same basket with homosexuality.

As for what causes homosexuality, I can’t say. I certainly don’t think it’s that different from what would cause heterosexuality.

 

[MacM]

Stole my Thoughts

CounslerCoffee,

You stole my lines but let me add a bit.

Which conduct homosexuality or pedos, etc does society protect or incarcerate?

The issue of being an illness or not is not the issue. The issue is what are the mores of the society. I lived in N.C. at one time and knew an old indian there and he had several daughters.

He claimed it was his responsibility by custom to initiate them into woman hood. That borders on religion, or the Mormons (some still) practicing Pologamy, our laws prohibit such activity inspite of the Constitution that says no law should restrict a religion.

So it is clearly a morality issue regardless if it were an illness or genetic.

I personally find it odd that homosexuals get legal protection and the mormans get busted.

Something is screwed up here.

 

[one_raven]

Originally posted by Mystech
I really can't think of anything that would guide someone to seek this, sure being a homosexual is kind of a raw deal most of the time, but that doesn't make one's heart any less compelled to find companionship, and it doesn't change one's taste in partners. I really can't imagine any healthy motivation for wanting to change one's own sexual orientation.

Of course you can think of things that could guide people to seek this.
You listed a few yourself.

It may not be healthy, but there IS motivation that exists.

Pressure to conform.
A need to fit in.
Religious beliefs.
Wanting to raise a family in the traditional sense (legal marriage, intercourse, pregnancy).
Aiming to please parents or family.
Having an "intinctual" feeling that it is wrong.

If there were no reasons to want to change it, this organization and thread would not even exist.
No one would be in the closet.
There would be no discrimintaion.
Heterosexuals would not marry members of the opposite sex.
There would not be a social stigma associated with it.

As I said, the reasons may not be healthy ones, but they are pretty obvious and quite powerful.

The thing about the need to seek companionship...
That is true, and that is EXACTLY why some people DO want to change this.
If they just wanted to fit in by not being homosexual, they could simply abstain from sex and not get into any relationshops.
Recognizing the need for companionship is part of what drives them to want to change, hoping they will find that companionship in a member of the opposite sex.

 

[Xev]

So it is clearly a morality issue regardless if it were an illness or genetic.

Comparing homosexual sex and paedophilia is like comparing consensual foreplay and gang rape.

 

[Mystech]

Originally posted by one_raven
Of course you can think of things that could guide people to seek this.
You listed a few yourself.

I said no healty reasons why one would be motivated to change their sexual orientation, and that still stands. Everything you've listed essentialy ammounts to social brain washing, and philosophies of heterosexism.

Originally posted by one_raven
If there were no reasons to want to change it, this organization and thread would not even exist.
No one would be in the closet.
There would be no discrimintaion.
Heterosexuals would not marry members of the opposite sex.
There would not be a social stigma associated with it.

I just have no idea where you are comming from with this. How would it be that no one would be in the closet under these circumstanses? Are you assuming that all homosexuals who remain closeted harbor secret fantasies of becoming heterosexuals? How would there be no descrimination? How would there be an end to heterosexuals carrying out their bussiness of marrying members of the opposite sex? I don't see how these issues tie in with one another at all.

Originally posted by one_raven
If they just wanted to fit in by not being homosexual, they could simply abstain from sex and not get into any relationshops.

Is this really so simple a matter? We're talking about real people here, not robots. You expect that the average person should be able to simply all together give up any hope for physical intimacy, or a romantic relationship with another person?

Originally posted by one_raven
Recognizing the need for companionship is part of what drives them to want to change, hoping they will find that companionship in a member of the opposite sex.

No, that's what a heterosexual does, a homosexual feels quite the same way as a heterosexual, only they have those emotions toward members of the same sex. I honestly can't think that this is how you meant to word your statement, because with it, you are implying that all homosexuals secretly lust after members of the opposite sex. . . do you not believe in homosexuals, then?

 

[Mystech]

Re: Stole my Thoughts

Originally posted by MacM
So it is clearly a morality issue regardless if it were an illness or genetic.

I couldn't agree more.

This brings up another point, Moraly, what third party has the right to dictate and regulate the relationship of one consenting adult with another? At what point does the relationship of two people become open for others to command? I honestly don't remember signing up for that one.

 

[one_raven]

Whoah.
Slow down.
I am not defending this shit-hole of an organization.
I don't think there is anything shameful or wrong with homosexuality.
You seems to have misunderstood (or maybe I was unclear with) everything I said.

I said no healty reasons why one would be motivated to change their sexual orientation, and that still stands. Everything you've listed essentialy ammounts to social brain washing, and philosophies of heterosexism.

FIRST you said:
"I really can't think of anything that would guide someone to seek this"
And I completely admitted that it is not healthy.
I agree with you that it is social brain-washing.

But that doesn't change the fact that these pressures are THERE, very real and very powerful.

I just have no idea where you are comming from with this. How would it be that no one would be in the closet under these circumstanses? Are you assuming that all homosexuals who remain closeted harbor secret fantasies of becoming heterosexuals? How would there be no descrimination? How would there be an end to heterosexuals carrying out their bussiness of marrying members of the opposite sex? I don't see how these issues tie in with one another at all.

You seem to be taking a defensive stance and as a result jumping to incorrect assumptions.

What I was referring to was that if there were no social pressures to not be homosexual, if there was no social brain-washing, if people were accepted and embraced regardless of their sexual preference then there would be no reason for people to be in the closet with their sexuality.

I never said there would be an end to homosexuality if people acted like heterosexuals.
I said that people would not act like heterosexuals if they were accepted as homosexual without prejudice and if these pressures to conform to the heterosexual ideal were not there.

Is this really so simple a matter? We're talking about real people here, not robots. You expect that the average person should be able to simply all together give up any hope for physical intimacy, or a romantic relationship with another person?

No I don't.
And that was exactly my point.
You took it completely out of context.
I was referring to homosexuals that decide to go through this type of bullshit psychological reconditioning (which I thought was clear by my post).
The fact that it ISN'T that simple.
If it WERE that simple the people that DID feel the need to fit into the social norm would do just that.

No, that's what a heterosexual does, a homosexual feels quite the same way as a heterosexual, only they have those emotions toward members of the same sex. I honestly can't think that this is how you meant to word your statement, because with it, you are implying that all homosexuals secretly lust after members of the opposite sex. . . do you not believe in homosexuals, then?

AGAIN, I was referring specifically to those homosexuals, who under social pressure to change who they are, and try to "be" heterosexual.

I think you completely misunderstood my intentions and my points in this post.

I am not FOR social reconditioning of homosexuals.
I am not AGAINST homosexuals.

I am agreeing with you.
All I am saying is the social pressures ARE there for homosexuals to deny and change who they are.
It is sad that it is there, and it should change, but it IS there.

Humans are a social animal and due to this most of them have a need to fit in.
The society that we have created and fostered greatly exaggerates that need.

This mentality needs to change, not just for sake of sexual equality, for many reasons.

 

[EvilPoet]

Question for those who still think homosexuality is a mental
disorder or some such - if homosexuality is natural for other
animals why is it not natural for us? What makes us different
than the animals in that respect?

 

[CounslerCoffee]

Question for those who still think homosexuality is a mental
disorder or some such - if homosexuality is natural for other
animals why is it not natural for us? What makes us different
than the animals in that respect?

Yes, but animals also go the way of incest. So my argument is this; can't some people be born as pedo's, incestious people, or beastiality people? If being born gay is genetic, then why aren't these things? I don't understand. Can someone explain the difference to me?