New law proposed to stop gay-straight conversion therapies

[Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant']

Fuck sake, when will this bullshit end?

Details of a new law that would stop counsellors providing gay-to-straight conversion therapy in the UK have been published.
It's a controversial process which the world's leading experts in psychology have described as potentially "dangerous" and "harmful". But in 2009 a survey found 16% of therapists in the UK had attempted the treatment.
The new bill, put forward by Swansea West MP Geraint Davies, would ban the practice.
He says: "I can't get rid of all gay-to-straight conversion therapy, but what this will do is make people aware of the issue."
But Mike Davidson thinks the service should be allowed. He provides what he calls "support" for people uncomfortable with being homosexual in Northern Ireland and tells Newsbeat he "converted" himself many years ago.
He says: "My concern is the options that were available to me are now being shut down for people whose goal is to marry an opposite sex partner because that's what they want."
In a statement the Department of Health said "Being gay is not an illness and it should never be treated as something which is curable - which is why we strongly oppose so called gay to straight 'conversion' therapy.
We are exploring ways of ensuring that this can never be funded by public money."

See the source link below for some accounts of those that have experienced this kind of 'therapy'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/25326525

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Such "therapy" is just another form of violence against LGBT people.

[RedSunrise]

Such "therapy" is just another form of violence against LGBT people.

How so? This kind of therapy isn't being forced on people...


In a statement the Department of Health said "Being gay is not an illness and it should never be treated as something which is curable - which is why we strongly oppose so called gay to straight 'conversion' therapy.

Erm... What? Depression isn't an illness. Let's not treat that anymore, because it isn't an illness and can't be fixed!

I am not homophobic, before anyone says that. I am afraid of government forcing people to except their sexual preferences if they want to change it. There should never be a law on therapeutic treatments. If someone wants to stop being gay? Let him! What does it matter to you?


It's a controversial process which the world's leading experts in psychology have described as potentially "dangerous" and "harmful".

As long as therapists are up front and honest about this before they start "treatment" this is completely fine, yes? Surgery is "dangerous", but it still happens.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

It's pretty common for parents to force minors into this kind of therapy actually.

It should also be pointed out that there is zero evidence to back up this therapy. So even if there was a situation where people voluntarily go in for this kind of treatment, which happens, these quacks are fleecing desperate and vulnerable people out of money.

[RedSunrise]

It's pretty common for parents to force minors into this kind of therapy actually.

This is true^ So... I wouldn't mind a law preventing these kind of therapies on minors, but this seems to be a problem with parents vs treatment. You can't just ban them assuming that EVERYONE who wants it is being forced by his mommy.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I edited my post, there is no evidence that this works and actually quite a lot showing that it doesn't. So at best this is a scam and at worst is some kind of torture. It's not something that should be allowed.

[Quail]

RedSunrise - As has already been said, there is no evidence that conversion therapy works, and a lot of evidence that it is harmful. Also, you fail to take into account the kind of society which makes people "choose" to change their sexuality. If it was really a choice, where are the "straight to gay" conversion therapists? The only reason I can imagine someone would want to undergo such therapy is if they were facing a lot of pressure from family or friends, or because of internalised homophobia.

[helot]

How so? This kind of therapy isn't being forced on people... Just because someone doesn't have a gun to their head doesn't mean they're not being forced. I assumed people on here would have a far more nuanced understanding of coercion.



Erm... What? Depression isn't an illness. Let's not treat that anymore, because it isn't an illness and can't be fixed!

I think it's pretty homophobic to imply homosexuality is an illness.

[RedSunrise]

I edited my post, there is no evidence that this works and actually quite a lot showing that it doesn't. So at best this is a scam and at worst is some kind of torture. It's not something that should be allowed.

Again. I agree, but I don't think dumb things should be illegal. (We wouldn't have YouTube then ;)) It is disgusting. I still, of course, have the right to do disgusting things to myself.


If it was really a choice, where are the "straight to gay" conversion therapists? The only reason I can imagine someone would want to undergo such therapy is if they were facing a lot of pressure from family or friends, or because of internalised homophobia.

Excellent point. But you cannot assume everyone does it because of social pressure. Where are "straight to gay"? Yes, probably society would have a fit. This needs to be changed in the minds of people not in attempts at "medical practice" (In quotes, because it is a sad failed excuse for therapy.)
A perfect world would have neither or both gay-straight & straight-gay. But that doesn't happen in our current biased society. This doesn't negate my single argument against this: You can do whatever you want and government should have no say. Even if your acts are self-harming (Unless of course there is evidence that it can turn you into a killer, etc. that will harm others).

My opinion...

[Radical Rambler]

The main problem I see with NARTH type 'therapy' is that it is generally conducted by people who are opposed to the homosexual identity mainly for religious reasons. The NARTH people still see it as a mental disorder, and they are seeking a 'cure' for the patient, when they should be developing an alternative understanding of the nature of sexual identity with the patient.

A better approach for clients seeking to be "cured" of their homosexuality would be to inform them that the homosexual identity is a freely chosen identity, and that they do not have to accept it. The dominant narrative of male homosexuals in American society sees themselves as a biological species, separate from the larger population by a mythical gay gene (or some other construct that preserves the notion of biological separateness). The patient should be assured that there is nothing wrong with choosing to accept the homosexual identity, but that if the patient doesn't want to, they don't have to accept it. The point should be to get the patient comfortable with whatever sexual identity they choose to adopt, regardless if they choose the homosexual identity, become a heterosexual, or something else entirely.

That the patient may still experience attraction to men, or has enjoyed sexual experiences with men in the past should be no obstacle. The patient should be assured that such feelings and behaviors have persisted in humanity for countless ages, without anyone ever adopting the modern invention of the homosexual identity. Lessening the attraction to men shouldn't be seen as important as the patient beginning to develop an attraction to the opposite sex. The patient could even be encouraged to develop feelings for 'boyish' looking women, or even trans-women.

Patients whose homosexual desires focus around being penetrated by other men could even be encouraged to become transwomen. In patients who have an overwhelming religious sense of guilt about their attraction to men, the patient could be informed that many major religious denominations actually support transgender people. A belief in the soul naturally lends itself to the idea that one has the soul of a female inside of a male body, and given the nature of modern gender reassignment surgery, the patient could even live a completely normal existence as a woman and be perceived that way by society around, and accepted as a woman by the religious authorities in their community.

[Quail]

Again. I agree, but I don't think dumb things should be illegal. (We wouldn't have YouTube then ;)) It is disgusting. I still, of course, have the right to do disgusting things to myself.
But there are people who are making money out of gay conversion therapy, so there is an exploitative relationship there between therapist and "patient".


Excellent point. But you cannot assume everyone does it because of social pressure. Where are "straight to gay"? Yes, probably society would have a fit. This needs to be changed in the minds of people not in attempts at "medical practice" (In quotes, because it is a sad failed excuse for therapy.)
A perfect world would have neither or both gay-straight & straight-gay. But that doesn't happen in our current biased society. This doesn't negate my single argument against this: You can do whatever you want and government should have no say. Even if your acts are self-harming (Unless of course there is evidence that it can turn you into a killer, etc. that will harm others).

Just... what? We live in a highly homophobic society. You can't argue that that doesn't have an impact on whether people see their sexuality as something that needs to be changed. In an ideal world, there would be no "need" for any kind of conversion therapy, because everyone would just accept each other for whatever orientation they happen to identify with.



That the patient may still experience attraction to men, or has enjoyed sexual experiences with men in the past should be no obstacle. The patient should be assured that such feelings and behaviors have persisted in humanity for countless ages, without anyone ever adopting the modern invention of the homosexual identity. Lessening the attraction to men shouldn't be seen as important as the patient beginning to develop an attraction to the opposite sex. The patient could even be encouraged to develop feelings for 'boyish' looking women, or even trans-women.
Right, an experiment: choose someone you don't fell remotely attracted to, who you don't imagine you ever could be attracted to, and encourage yourself to develop feelings for them. Successful? I doubt it.


Patients whose homosexual desires focus around being penetrated by other men could even be encouraged to become transwomen. In patients who have an overwhelming religious sense of guilt about their attraction to men, the patient could be informed that many major religious denominations actually support transgender people. A belief in the soul naturally lends itself to the idea that one has the soul of a female inside of a male body, and given the nature of modern gender reassignment surgery, the patient could even live a completely normal existence as a woman and be perceived that way by society around, and accepted as a woman by the religious authorities in their community.
...What? Gay men don't want to become women. They're men who want to have sex with men. I don't see how it would not be damaging and downright irresponsible to suggest that someone takes measures to live as a person of a gender they don't identify with, because it's more "acceptable" than homosexual behaviour.

[Radical Rambler]

Right, an experiment: choose someone you don't fell remotely attracted to, who you don't imagine you ever could be attracted to, and encourage yourself to develop feelings for them. Successful? I doubt it.

How do you know a man who doesn't want to self-identity as a homosexual can never "feel remotely attracted" to someone? Perhaps there are girls who look like effeminate men that the patient might be attracted to, or women who have a more masculine appearance. Nor does the patient need to be immediately attracted to them. The patient would be encouraged to develop an attraction to some member of the opposite sex. The point is for the patient to develop an attraction to someone of the opposite sex. Once the patient does this, it will become apparent to the patient that the binary categories of the dominant homosexual discourse is altogether incorrect, both in an abstract way and in a personal way.


What? Gay men don't want to become women. They're men who want to have sex with men.

Men who have adopted the homosexual identity don't want to become women. That's true almost by definition. However, we aren't discussing men who have adopted the homosexual identity, but men seeking psychological therapy to get rid of the homosexual identity. Some of these men may discover that the only proper resolutions to their sexual identity conflict is to become transwomen.


I don't see how it would not be damaging and downright irresponsible to suggest that someone takes measures to live as a person of a gender they don't identify with, because it's more "acceptable" than homosexual behaviour.

The hypothetical patient is seeking relief from their feelings about their sexual identity. Most of them will no doubt simply want to discard any feelings they experience toward members of their own sex. Some will seek other resolutions to their conflicts over their sexual identity, which may include becoming bisexual or trans. The point of any therapy to help the person who seeks a 'cure' for their same sex attraction should be to make them understand that whatever they want to become is okay. The patient must first understand that there is nothing preventing them from changing their sexual identity in order to for them to become whatever it is they want to be.

[Quail]

I don't know if you understand the difference between sexuality and gender identity so I'm going to leave this here:
http://www.nomorestrangers.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/The-Genderbread-Person.jpg


How do you know a man who doesn't want to self-identity as a homosexual can never "feel remotely attracted" to someone? Perhaps there are girls who look like effeminate men that the patient might be attracted to, or women who have a more masculine appearance. Nor does the patient need to be immediately attracted to them. The patient would be encouraged to develop an attraction to some member of the opposite sex. The point is for the patient to develop an attraction to someone of the opposite sex. Once the patient does this, it will become apparent to the patient that the binary categories of the dominant homosexual discourse is altogether incorrect, both in an abstract way and in a personal way.
I admit I am bisexual so I don't completely understand what it is like to be totally gay or totally straight, but I have many friends who identify as such and who simply aren't attracted to people who aren't of their preferred gender. I really don't think that attraction is something that can be "encouraged" to develop, especially towards someone who isn't of your preferred gender.


Men who have adopted the homosexual identity don't want to become women. That's true almost by definition. However, we aren't discussing men who have adopted the homosexual identity, but men seeking psychological therapy to get rid of the homosexual identity. Some of these men may discover that the only proper resolutions to their sexual identity conflict is to become transwomen.

The hypothetical patient is seeking relief from their feelings about their sexual identity. Most of them will no doubt simply want to discard any feelings they experience toward members of their own sex. Some will seek other resolutions to their conflicts over their sexual identity, which may include becoming bisexual or trans. The point of any therapy to help the person who seeks a 'cure' for their same sex attraction should be to make them understand that whatever they want to become is okay. The patient must first understand that there is nothing preventing them from changing their sexual identity in order to for them to become whatever it is they want to be.
First, by "sexual identity," do you mean "gender identity"? Because being transgender is not an orientation, but a gender identity. I don't think you can just "become" bisexual or trans, at least not because you wish to be. I'm actually a little confused about what you're advocating here.

I don't understand why anybody is defending the "right" of people to put themselves through damaging "therapy" because they live in a homophobic society. Seriously, what you should be doing is questioning why this kind of thing exists in the first place, and how we can dismantle the heteropatriarchal structures that influence people to "choose" to change their orientation. As I said above, in an ideal society nobody would seek to change their orientation because everyone would be accepted and there would be no "need" for conversion therapy. Why are you focussing on defending people's "right" to think there is something wrong with them instead of trying to fix what is wrong with society?

[Quail]

On second thoughts... this shit (http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/the-lies-and-dangers-of-reparative-therapy) shouldn't be (http://www.skepticink.com/gps/2013/10/31/the-bad-science-behind-reparative-therapy/) up for (http://www.livescience.com/38987-gay-conversion-therapy-facts.html) debate (http://jezebel.com/5331332/psychologists-reparative-therapy-for-gays-is-useless-and-harmful). There is ample evidence that conversion therapy is harmful and if you refuse to acknowledge that in favour of the ridiculous idea that "people should be free to do whatever they want" in a society where they do not truly have the freedom to make those choices, you probably don't belong here.

[Radical Rambler]

Cute picture.


I admit I am bisexual so I don't completely understand what it is like to be totally gay or totally straight, but I have many friends who identify as such and who simply aren't attracted to people who aren't of their preferred gender. I really don't think that attraction is something that can be "encouraged" to develop, especially towards someone who isn't of your preferred gender.That you don't "believe" it doesn't make it not so.

The notion of sexual identity generally promoted by people who identify as bisexual is the "Kinsey Scale" idea. Everyone or nearly everyone (so the idea goes) is actually bisexual. Their sexuality and attraction to either sex is from 0 to 6, with almost everyone falling somewhere between 1 and 5. This notion itself is in contradiction to the dominant homosexual notion of sexual identity, which is that men who identify as homosexual are biologically separate from heterosexuals. This contradiction of perceived sexual identity leads to the very common notion amongst homosexual men that bisexual men are either just confused heterosexuals who will soon revert to exclusively heterosexual relationships, or gay men who don't want to fully come out.


First, by "sexual identity," do you mean "gender identity"? Because being transgender is not an orientation, but a gender identity.By "sexual identity," I mean how the person perceives their sexuality, which is often (but not always) intimately bound up with how they view their gender.


I don't think you can just "become" bisexual or trans, at least not because you wish to be. I'm actually a little confused about what you're advocating here.Except people become bisexual and trans and later discard these identities. Many trans people have went through a "de-transitioning" process, and many bisexual people do fulfill the common stereotype of the identity either being a 'half-way-house' between heterosexual and homosexual, or an identity adopted briefly and discarded for exclusively heterosexual relationships.


I don't understand why anybody is defending the "right" of people to put themselves through damaging "therapy" because they live in a homophobic society. Seriously, what you should be doing is questioning why this kind of thing exists in the first place, and how we can dismantle the heteropatriarchal structures that influence people to "choose" to change their orientation. As I said above, in an ideal society nobody would seek to change their orientation because everyone would be accepted and there would be no "need" for conversion therapy. Why are you focussing on defending people's "right" to think there is something wrong with them instead of trying to fix what is wrong with societyOne could imagine this type of therapy being needed in even highly tolerant societies. People will undoubtedly always have conflicting feelings about their sexual identity and will seek out psychological services to help them relieve stress and anxiety associated with it. The point of the 'conversion' therapy should be to help the patient become what they choose to become, rather than seeking to "cure" their same-sex attraction. That is where most 'conversion' therapy goes wrong.

[Quail]

That you don't "believe" it doesn't make it not so.

What I'm saying is that many people can't even imagine wanting to be intimate with someone of their non-preferred gender. Why do you think it's so important those people are allowed to be encourages to try to force themselves into an identity that they are probably not capable of living up to?


The notion of sexual identity generally promoted by people who identity as bisexual is the "Kinsey Scale" idea. Everyone or nearly everyone (so the idea goes) is actually bisexual. Their sexuality and attraction to either sex is from 0 to 6, with almost everyone falling somewhere between 1 and 5. This notion itself is in contradiction to the dominant homosexual notion of sexual identity, which is that men who identity as homosexual are biologically separate from heterosexuals. This contradiction of perceived sexual identity leads to the very common notion amongst homosexual men that bisexual men are either just confused heterosexuals who will soon revert to exclusively heterosexual relationships, or gay men who don't want to fully come out.
Okay - but some people aren't bisexual and you can't dictate to them that actually they are? I don't quite see what you're getting at. Sexual orientation is complex and doesn't fit the "gay-straight" binary anywhere near as neatly as most people think, but that doesn't mean that gay people and straight people don't exist.


Except people become bisexual and trans and later discard these identities. Many trans people have went through a "de-transitioning" process, and many bisexual people do fulfill the common stereotype of the identity either being a 'half-house' between heterosexual and homosexual, or an identity adopted briefly and discarded for exclusively heterosexual relationships.
There's a difference between your orientation changing as you change and grow as a person, and your orientation changing because you choose to change it. I don't disagree that sexuality can change, but I don't think it is a conscious choice. I would say the evidence against conversion therapy demonstrates that people can't simply choose to change their orientation.


One could imagine this type of therapy being needed in even highly tolerant societies. People will undoubtedly always have conflicting feelings about their sexual identity and will seek out psychological services to help them relieve stress and anxiety associated with it. The point of the 'conversion' therapy should be to help the patient become what they choose to become, rather than seeking to "cure" their same-sex attraction. That is where most 'conversion' therapy goes wrong.
In this case, it wouldn't be "conversion" therapy, it would be a case of helping people to come to terms with and explore their attractions. If there was no such thing as a "normal" orientation and no orientation was favoured over any other, why would people be so desperate to deny their feelings and change themselves?

[Radical Rambler]

What I'm saying is that many people can't even imagine wanting to be intimate with someone of their non-preferred gender. Why do you think it's so important those people are allowed to be encourages to try to force themselves into an identity that they are probably not capable of living up to?

What "many people" can or can not imagine is beside the point. The patient that voluntarily seeks out 'conversion' therapy undoubtedly can "imagine" themselves in a stable heterosexual relationship, and undoubtedly desires such a thing for their future. Otherwise, why would they seek therapy in the first place?


Okay - but some people aren't bisexual and you can't dictate to them that actually they are? I don't quite see what you're getting at.

I must say the same to you, as I don't recognize your (apparent) paraphrasing of my statement, nor your reply to it.

The point of my statement is just as you said, to highlight that "sexual orientation is complex," which is something any patient seeking out "conversion" therapy must also understand in order to freely chose to become what they want to become.

The dominant homosexual discourse on the nature of sexual identity, the idea of biological separateness of the homosexual, is totally incompatible with any sort of 'conversion' therapy. If a patient believes such a notion, there is no possibility of any therapy allowing for the patient to freely choose to become anything else. The dominant narrative will forever lock them into a suspicion that they are not being "true" to their real biological nature, and would make any therapy utterly pointless for the patient.


There's a difference between your orientation changing as you change and grow as a person, and your orientation changing because you choose to change it. I don't disagree that sexuality can change, but I don't think it is a conscious choice.

Again, that you don't "think" people can choose to become something else doesn't make it so. The point of the therapy would be to help the patient "grow" into the person they want to be.


In this case, it wouldn't be "conversion" therapy, it would be a case of helping people to come to terms with and explore their attractions.

It wouldn't be the "conversion therapy" as practiced by the NARTH and religious types no, but it would be a basis for allowing people who suffer inner conflict over their desires and seek psychological services to allow themselves to identify as heterosexuals and live a heterosexual life, if that is what they want to become.

[RedBen]

oh wow. now the christians have another reason to scream about oppressed they are. i hope they ban that shit here in the states.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

the homosexual identity is a freely chosen identity, and that they do not have to accept it.
You're confusing identity with orientation. We can choose how we want to identify, but we can't choose our attractions.


The dominant narrative of male homosexuals in American society sees themselves as a biological species, separate from the larger population by a mythical gay gene (or some other construct that preserves the notion of biological separateness).
Gay men don't think of themselves as a separate biological species. That may be the most bizarre anti-gay argument I've ever seen. It also shows a complete misunderstanding of genetics on your part. If there are genetic factors relevant to sexual orientation (and there is evidence to suggest there are), it doesn't make anyone a separate species, anymore than having a genetic factor for blue eyes makes one a separate species.


The patient could even be encouraged to develop feelings for 'boyish' looking women, or even trans-women.
As a trans woman, I want someone to be attracted to me because they're attracted to me, not because I'm a substitute for something else. And it's offensive to suggest that a gay man in denial should be encouraged to be attracted to me because I'm trans.


Patients whose homosexual desires focus around being penetrated by other men could even be encouraged to become transwomen.
Or, better yet, just encourage him to accept his same-sex attractions. If he identifies as a man, why would he want to become a woman? People don't choose to be trans, either, yet now you're arguing a man who doesn't experience gender dysphoria can just magically become trans.

I find it very suspicious that you just joined today, and all you've posted about is this bizarre homophobia of yours. I don't even see a post by you in the Introductions forum. Do you have any interest in revolutionary politics, or are you a homophobic troll? Moderators, keep an eye on this one.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

The patient that voluntarily seeks out 'conversion' therapy undoubtedly can "imagine" themselves in a stable heterosexual relationship, and undoubtedly desires such a thing for their future. Otherwise, why would they seek therapy in the first place?
Because we still live in a homo/bi-phobic society, and some LGB people can't deal with both their sexual desires and the reality of what it can mean to be LGB, especially if they come from a socially conservative cultural background or have bought into the idea that heterosexuality is "normal."

[blake 3:17]

What about providing straight-to-gay therapy?

[Radical Rambler]

Hmm, the forum says I can't post links, but I don't have any links in my message.

[Radical Rambler]

You're confusing identity with orientation. We can choose how we want to identify, but we can't choose our attractions.Except people can and do choose their attractions all the time.


Gay men don't think of themselves as a separate biological species. That may be the most bizarre anti-gay argument I've ever seen.It's not an “anti-gay argument,” but an acute observation first made, I believe, by Michel Foucault:


homosexuality appeared as one of the forms of sexuality when it was transposed from the practice of sodomy into a kind of interior androgyny, a hermaphrodism of the soul. The sodomite had been a temporary aberration; the homosexual was now a species..

As a trans woman, I want someone to be attracted to me because they're attracted to me, not because I'm a substitute for something else. And it's offensive to suggest that a gay man in denial should be encouraged to be attracted to me because I'm trans. The point of encouraging a hypothetical patient seeking “conversion” therapy to seek out a relationship with a gender non-conforming female, or a transwoman, would be to encourage the patient to develop feelings for the opposite sex, and to see things differently that what the dominant homosexual narrative says about sexual identity. Whether anyone reciprocated would be entirely up to them.


Or, better yet, just encourage him to accept his same-sex attractions. Any patient seeking “conversion” therapy obviously doesn't want that. I agree though, that any “conversion” therapy should also have the outcome of allowing the patient to come to terms with the homosexual identity, if they feel they are unable to become heterosexual.


If he identifies as a man, why would he want to become a woman? To continue having sex with men while not identifying as a homosexual. It is highly unlikely anyone seeking out “conversion” therapy would want to do anything other than become a heterosexual, but this could be an option for some.


People don't choose to be trans People choose their gender identity just as they choose their sexual identity.

Incidentally, it is common for homosexual men to perceive transwomen as homosexual men with a mental disorder. This is also a reflection of how the homosexual man perceives himself as biologically separate. The trans identity becomes inconceivable in this context of self-understanding.



I find it very suspicious that you just joined today, and all you've posted about is this bizarre homophobia of yours Nothing I've said is homophobic, and why is it suspicious I joined? Do people not join this forum very often or something?


I don't even see a post by you in the Introductions forum. I wasn't aware that is something people are supposed to do.


Do you have any interest in revolutionary politics, or are you a homophobic troll? I definitely have an interest in revolutionary politics and queer theory. The suggestion that I am a homophobic troll is just bizarre, though typical of people who adhere to the dominant homosexual discourse about human sexual identities.

[Radical Rambler]

What about providing straight-to-gay therapy?

Heterosexuals who want to become gay simply seek out homosexual relationships.

There is an episode of the show American Dad where the father tries to become gay, but when he gets in the bed with his homosexual neighbor and kisses him, he suddenly "realizes" he can't be gay.

I thought to myself upon seeing the scene, "Wouldn't a normal gay wait to after he put it in him before he decided that."

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Except people can and do choose their attractions all the time.
Could you please explain how that process works for people? When I realized I was bisexual, I struggled with it at first. I didn't choose to have those attractions, and I couldn't choose not to have them. I could have chosen to ignore them, certainly, but that wouldn't make them go away.


It's not an “anti-gay argument,” but an acute observation first made, I believe, by Michel Foucault:
Not having read Foucault in any great detail, I don't know what his intent was, but the way you're using the argument is bizarre, in that you believe that gay men think they're a separate species.

You're also confusing identity and orientation, which are two different things. One doesn't need to have a homosexual or bisexual social identity (a construct) to have homosexual or bisexual desires or orientations.

The fact they they have to go through "therapy" that's more akin to brainwashing techniques, and even then so many "ex"-gays have gone back to being gay, doesn't suggest what you say is true.


The point of encouraging a hypothetical patient seeking “conversion” therapy to seek out a relationship with a gender non-conforming female, or a transwoman, would be to encourage the patient to develop feelings for the opposite sex
If they're being encouraged to develop an attraction to the opposite sex or gender, why would they need to seek out a gender non-conforming cis woman or a trans woman for a relationship, rather than just a woman in general? :confused:


People choose their gender identity just as they choose their sexual identity.
And your experience is...?


The suggestion that I am a homophobic troll is just bizarre.
Then I look forward to your participation in other forums.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

There is an episode of the show American Dad
Now there's a great source of information for human sexuality. :lol:

[Radical Rambler]

Could you please explain how that process works for people?

It's easy. People choose who they want to fixate their desires own. People run into all sorts of attractive people throughout their daily lives, but never develop any real desires for them, because they do not fixate on them, they do not fantasize about them, etc.


When I realized I was bisexual, I struggled with it at first.

Did this occur before or after you decided to transition into being a woman?


I didn't choose to have those attractions, and I couldn't choose not to have them.

Of course you can.


Not having read Foucault in any great detail, I don't know what his intent was, but the way you're using the argument is bizarre, in that you believe that gay men think they're a separate species.

They do believe that, though they wouldn't quite put it that way. Most homosexual men do believe they are biologically separate from heterosexual people, though a minority of homosexual men do acknowledge they choose to be homosexual (queerbychoice.com).


You're also confusing identity and orientation, which are two different things. One doesn't need to have a homosexual or bisexual social identity (a construct) to have homosexual or bisexual desires or orientations.

Here you are just moving the biology-based idea away from idea and onto the idea of orientation. There really isn't anything but semantics going on here to distinguish the concept from idea. Even the APA says sexual orientation "also refers to a person's sense of identity based on those attractions, related behaviors, and membership in a community of others who share those attractions." The concept that sustain the dominant homosexual narrative (biological separateness) is moved away from the chosen identity to a more nebulous conception of "orientation."


The fact they they have to go through "therapy" that's more akin to brainwashing techniques, and even then so many "ex"-gays have gone back to being gay, doesn't suggest what you say is true.

I'm not sure what this has to do with Foucault's observation (which is what this comment seems to be responding to). But the line put forward against the "Ex-gay" stuff does have its basis in the homosexual belief of biological separateness. Without this belief, there wouldn't be attempts to stop people from seeking out this therapy. The homosexual reaction against this therapy is bound up with their conviction that their homosexuality is a function of their biology and nothing more.


If they're being encouraged to develop an attraction to the opposite sex or gender, why would they need to seek out a gender non-conforming cis woman or a trans woman for a relationship, rather than just a woman in general

You're right, but it may be easier for someone who has developed physical attraction to men to develop an attraction to a more masculine woman.


And your experience is...?

The process is similar to the Cass Identity Model of coming out. At some point the subject chooses the identity.


Then I look forward to your participation in other forums.

Thank you!


Now there's a great source of information for human sexuality.

Indeed! But what is interesting about the episode is that it just reinforces the dominant homosexual narrative, but one that is transparently false. Any heterosexual who desired to become a homosexual would simply do it. Everyone around them would even go so far as to say that any straight person who desired to become gay was already probably gay, and that they were probably always gay and just now realizing it.

[Remus Bleys]

This bullshit about changing your sexuality is precisely the reason this is actually a good law.
I mean going to this therapy is in no way shape or form voluntary. It is an act of coercison from from a heterosexist society that tries to destroy a fundamental aspect of a person and it sickens me.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Did this occur before or after you decided to transition into being a woman?
I realized I had bisexual desires long before I transitioned, but only came out as bisexual after transition. In fact, before transition, I did my best to suppress those desires and wish them away. Guess what? They couldn't be wished away.


Of course you can.
Do you have personal experience in this matter?


Most homosexual men do believe they are biologically separate from heterosexual people
Even if most gay men believe there's a "gay gene," that doesn't mean they think they're biologically separate. You do understand that genetic factors related to human behavior don't make someone biologically separate?


though a minority of homosexual men do acknowledge they choose to be homosexual (queerbychoice.com).
I'm aware of that site. I can't speak to their experiences, but I don't need to. If they say they're queer, that's good enough for me.

By the same token, they can't speak to my experiences, or the numerous other queer/trans people who knew from a very young age that there was something different about them that set them apart from the hetero/cis societal norm.

But...I am troubled by how you keep bringing up "homosexual men" to the exclusion of others. That site is actually ran by a bisexual woman who identifies as queer. Don't make assumptions that queer = gay man.


Here you are just moving the biology-based idea away from idea and onto the idea of orientation.
No, I'm actually not. I believe that human sexuality is a complex process where there may be multiple things, genetic or environmental, that can contribute to one's orientation.


Without this belief, there wouldn't be attempts to stop people from seeking out this therapy. The homosexual reaction against this therapy is bound up with their conviction that their homosexuality is a function of their biology and nothing more.
No, it's based on science that such "therapy" doesn't work and is more akin to coercive brainwashing techniques. More to the point, in many cases people, especially queer children, are forced to undergo such abusive "therapy."

It's funny that you brought up queerbychoice.com. One of the pages there has this to say: "Exclusive heterosexuality is not ordained by any higher force than human culture itself—it is a human byproduct of the terror and cowardice promoted by a twisted religious belief which pretends that sex exists only for reproductive purposes and condemns every form of nonreproductive pleasure, from masturbation to queer sex to all forms of birth control."

The same "terror and cowardice" that leads parents to abuse or condone the abuse of their LGBT children in the guise of "therapy."

[Lily Briscoe]

I don't get the impression that 'Radical Rambler' is a homophobic troll at all, just someone with slightly different ideas about sexuality. It seems pretty absurd to pounce on them and question their motivations (for not posting a thread in the Introductions forum, of all things; I believe that's called grasping at straws) just because you don't agree with what they're saying. To be clear, I don't agree with a lot of what they're saying either (though I am deeply critical of the whole narrative around 'gay genes'/the idea that sexual orientation is hardwired, as well as gay/lesbian/bisexual identity politics in general), and I agree that it is kind of in poor taste to talk about gay-straight 'conversation therapy' in terms of some potentially-liberating abstraction in a thread about the absolutely horrible practice that actually exists. But subjectively having 'poor taste' hardly makes someone a homophobe or a troll, and I think there is something kind of disturbing about the fact that someone is demanding to know this poster's 'personal experience' with regard to the subject matter, as if they are obliged to come clean about the nature of their sexual relationships in order to prove they're not a bigot.

My impression (and they can correct me if I'm wrong) was that they kept talking about "homosexual males to the exclusion of others" because most of the 'research' touted in support of genetic and biological causes of homosexuality (and the whole narrative about same-sex attraction that is built around this) seems to be based almost exclusively on gay men. Whereas the research I have seen that deals specifically with same-sex attraction in biological women actually seems to point in the opposite direction--far more toward fluidity, social/environmental factors, and yes perhaps also some kind of 'choice' than toward orientation being genetically or biologically determined from birth and static throughout life. Somehow this never seems to be worthy of consideration to the 'gay gene' proponents, though, and the research on gay men is taken to be universal (rather than making it explicit that it's about "homosexual males to the exclusion of others", which I think is actually warranted when that is who you are talking about)

Personally I am pretty agnostic about whether people can consciously change their sexuality or not. I definitely don't necessarily think it is impossible, though (however I'd imagine if the 'conscious choice' is motivated by shame and fear of social consequences, and is attempted through repression of desires--as opposed to attempting to find something attractive/desirable that wasn't previously considered to be--then it will probably inevitably fail).

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

But subjectively having 'poor taste' hardly makes someone a homophobe or a troll, and I think there is something kind of disturbing about the fact that someone is demanding to know this poster's 'personal experience' with regard to the subject matter, as if they are obliged to come clean about the nature of their sexual relationships in order to prove they're not a bigot.
I accepted his explanation that he's not a bigot. You misunderstand why I'm asking what his experience is. He's making authoritative statements about being able to choose sexual attractions, so, yes, it is relevant if he has personal experience with that.

[Ocean Seal]

How so? This kind of therapy isn't being forced on people...



Erm... What? Depression isn't an illness. Let's not treat that anymore, because it isn't an illness and can't be fixed!

I am not homophobic, before anyone says that. I am afraid of government forcing people to except their sexual preferences if they want to change it. There should never be a law on therapeutic treatments. If someone wants to stop being gay? Let him! What does it matter to you?



As long as therapists are up front and honest about this before they start "treatment" this is completely fine, yes? Surgery is "dangerous", but it still happens.
Hold on are you for real?

[the debater]

There is the possibility of how people should stick to the sexual orientation that nature gave them. If someone is born straight, they should stick to being straight, and if someone is born gay, they should stick to being gay.

Here's interesting information from Wikipedia, covering both sides of the birth order theory:


The fraternal birth order effect is the strongest known biodemographic predictor of sexual orientation. According to several studies, each older brother increases a man's odds of having a homosexual orientation by 28–48%. The fraternal birth order effect accounts for approximately one seventh of the prevalence of homosexuality in men. There seems to be no effect on sexual orientation in women, and no effect related to the number of older sisters.


The fraternal birth order effect has also been observed among male-to-female transsexuals: MtF transsexuals who are sexually interested in men have a greater number of older brothers than MtF transsexuals who are sexually interested in women. This has been reported in samples from Canada, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Polynesia.


The effect has been found even in males not raised with their biological brothers, suggesting an in-utero environmental causation. To explain this finding, a maternal immune response has been hypothesized. Male fetuses produce H-Y antigens which may be involved in the sexual differentiation of vertebrates. Other studies have suggested the influence of birth order was not due to a biological, but a social process.


A study by Francis (2008), using the same Add Health survey but with broader analysis, saw a very weak correlation of male same-sex attraction with having multiple older brothers (but did find a significant negative correlation of male same-sex attraction with having older sisters).


The fraternal birth order effect appears to interact with handedness, as the incidence of homosexuality correlated with an increase in older brothers is seen only in right-handed males.


McConaghy (2006) found no relationship between the strength of the effect and degree of homosexual feelings, rather than homosexual identity or homosexual behavior, leading him to conclude that the influence of birth order on degree of homosexual feelings was not due to a biological, but a social process.


Sexual orientation is theorized as possibly being a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences. The American Psychological Association stated, "Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles." However, according to Royal College of Psychiatrists, there is "no substantive evidence" which suggests parenting or early childhood experiences play a role.
Results from a 2008 twin study were consistent with moderate, primarily genetic, familial effects, and moderate to large effects of the non shared environment (social and biological) on same-sex sexual behavior.


In a 30-year longitudinal study published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, although the authors found that men with histories of childhood sexual abuse were more likely to report ever having had same-sex sexual partners, they did not find any "significant relationships between childhood physical abuse or neglect and same-sex sexual orientation in adulthood;" neither men nor women with histories of childhood physical abuse, sexual abuse, or neglect reported more same-sex sexual partners in the previous year or same-sex romantic cohabitation compared to men and women without such histories. Authors of the study speculated that "sexual abuse may result in uncertainty regarding sexual orientation and greater experimentation with both same- and opposite-sex relationships," but may not affect ultimate sexual orientation.

I should note that regardless of the exact causes of homosexuality in males or females, antagonizing gay people I personally believe should not at all be a major priority of ours. For me personally, the worst possible "sins" are actions that are based on unrighteous anger, pride, and selfishness. And I have to admit, that I absolutely despise pride. It's an abomination in my opinion, and that's probably the major reason I actually like to debate with white supremacists. :sneaky:

Anyways, RedSunrise, welcome to Revleft. I should let you know that there are some people here who are "extremist" in their mindsets. However, there are still plenty of members such as myself who are pretty reasonable, and don't fit the worst stereotypes bestowed upon radical leftists by conservatives or any other of our opponents. I do not hate white people, I don't hate Tim Tebow or Jeremy Lin or other religious followers simply because they're religious, and I also am entirely aware of the racism that is exhibited by certain Jews in Israel, and members of the Black Panther Party. The best solution to the abortion issue is in my opinion to fund sex education and to ensure access to affordable birth control for young men and women.

I think you'll also notice that I personally tend to deal in facts and logic even more so than other leftists. :lol: