Appreciating the usual Gawker tone on this, of course, but in seriousness one of my close family members said "Until a doctor," because my word wasn't enough, "tells me it has to be this way, I'll always see this as a crippling affliction I hope can be changed." And this was just five years ago.
Emailed the APA statement, obvs. So yeah, thanks APA.
@MattGaymon: The APA has not considered homosexuality a "disorder" since 1973. Even before then, many psychologists and doctors were on record with the opinion that homosexuality was not a disorder. The APA Help Center website has a great summary here.
@iplaudius: I know, but it's specifically the "change" part that my family member is (was!) hoping for. And this APA statement addresses that, specifically.
@MattGaymon: Well, like the Cajun Boy, I don't understand why the doctors had to wait for the motherfucking APA, the authority on psychology in our country, to issue an opinion on this, since the editors and readers at the Gawker Media Network already find this to be obvious.
I am proud that the tone of this post is to ridicule research conducted to help gay people navigate a personal and public environment that can be incredibly hostile to them, even in 2009. A laudatory nod for their work would have been totally out of line.
From what I can tell, the Bible-thumper therapies consist of convincing same sex sinners that the cause of all the unhappiness in their lives is the result of their homosexual lifestyling. Like adolescents, they're convinced that happiness is as easy to obtain as finding the right (opposite marriage) soul mate. As someone raised by a closeted evangelical minister, I can assure them that that isn't actually so.
I can't help remembering Strom Thurmond's question to the gay rights activist who spoke (obviously against confirmation) at the Bork hearings: "Have any o' you boys tried going to a doctor to see if you could get yourselves cured?" When the activist responded that the medical community did not believe that homosexuality was a disease, Strom simply repeated the question. Good times, good times.
...and tonight hundreds of good christian men will go home and celebrate their successful conversion by hate-fucking their wives then weeping until morning curled up in the shower with a shampoo bottle up their ass.
Did anyone else notice the WSJ's take was a little different?They reported "Psychological Association Revises Treatment Guidelines to Allow Counselors to Help Clients Reject Their Same-Sex Attractions" [tinyurl.com]
@Jessestalker: That's weird. As someone who believes in staying monogamous, I reject my opposite-sex attractions all the time. Somehow they come back at the oddest times.
@Mediahohoho: am in the same boat with my monogamy vs. attractions, but luckily the APA's members have plenty of anti-depressants in their arsenal that take care of it.
@Mikey-B: So-called straight married men have no problem with the gays ... as long as their wives don't find out what they're doing in those few free moments before work, at lunch, or right after the 5pm whistle blows ... so to speak.
@BooWahBabe: I work at a bookstore and the other day a man bought, among other things, a gay porn magazine. I thought nothing of it until I noticed the wedding ring on his finger and I had to give him an imaginary side-eye.
This is only shocking to those who considered homosexuality shocking in the first place, and tried to create "camps" for those who dared go against God's law.
When those camps didn't work, would those who created them admit guilt? Never. Those ones within the camps who committed suicide? Troubled individuals. Those who were in those camps and spoke out against them? Apostates. And were these camps shut down? Absolutely not, thanks to "religious freedom".
08/11/09
08/06/09
Emailed the APA statement, obvs. So yeah, thanks APA.
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
I am proud that the tone of this post is to ridicule research conducted to help gay people navigate a personal and public environment that can be incredibly hostile to them, even in 2009. A laudatory nod for their work would have been totally out of line.
08/07/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/07/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/07/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
:)
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
08/06/09
When those camps didn't work, would those who created them admit guilt? Never. Those ones within the camps who committed suicide? Troubled individuals. Those who were in those camps and spoke out against them? Apostates. And were these camps shut down? Absolutely not, thanks to "religious freedom".