[bbgun]

(07-20-2017 09:58 AM)heavy Wrote:  

Like I said, I don't think guys here hate gays. Personally, I think gays are gross just because I think other guys are gross. The idea of other people having sex is strange, but at least with hetero and les sex there's at least one chick. Two dudes is disgusting, like thinking about me masturbating is disgusting...no chick.

This guy cuts through the bullshit

https://therightstuff.biz/2016/12/11/disgust-vs-phobia/

[debeguiled]

(07-20-2017 02:51 PM)ElFlaco Wrote:  

If success in conversion therapy means not engaging in gay sex anymore, that seems doable as long as there's high motivation, probably for religious reasons.

But if the idea is eliminating desires towards other men, I'm skeptical. And creating desire towards women when it isn't already present (not already bisexual in desire) seems unlikely as well.

Overall, it reminds me of spot reducing -- a nice idea not based in reality.

I think Nicolosi views homosexual activity as an attempt by a person to repair their feelings of inadequacy as a male or female.

The same way drugs can be called self medicating.

By addressing the underlying issues, the need to use lessens, in this case use sex with the same sex, and your more natural instincts towards the opposite sex can emerge.

I don't think he claims people are often totally cured, and that the homosexual thoughts and actions can come back under times of stress.

It reminds me of an interview I read with a monk who said that when priests stopped adhering to their vows of celibacy, there was usually some other underlying issue that wasn't being addressed, usually anger.

You are right about the high motivation, and he claims that the people who come to him often feel homosexual urges and do not want to, and he can help them with that.

This would not work on someone who is forced to see him because of family or church.

[Sonoma]

I can understand prohibiting conversion therapy for youth under a given age, but to prohibit it for adults who seek it is definitely government overreach, especially into what's usually a religious activity

[RoastBeefCurtains4Me]

(07-20-2017 06:46 PM)Sonoma Wrote:  

I can understand prohibiting conversion therapy for youth under a given age, but to prohibit it for adults who seek it is definitely government overreach, especially into what's usually a religious activity

Parents should have as much right to take their minor children to therapy as adults have to decide on the therapy for themselves. It's human nature to want your children to conform to community standards and to grow up and raise a family, and teach their children to do the same.

Somewhere along the line, the left managed to make this seem wrong, but families teaching community standards to their children is the very basis of civilization. The left wants to make this sound oppressive because they are all about freaks, bums, and aliens.

[weambulance]

(07-20-2017 07:07 PM)RoastBeefCurtains4Me Wrote:  

(07-20-2017 06:46 PM)Sonoma Wrote:  

I can understand prohibiting conversion therapy for youth under a given age, but to prohibit it for adults who seek it is definitely government overreach, especially into what's usually a religious activity

Parents should have as much right to take their minor children to therapy as adults have to decide on the therapy for themselves. It's human nature to want your children to conform to community standards and to grow up and raise a family, and teach their children to do the same.

Somewhere along the line, the left managed to make this seem wrong, but families teaching community standards to their children is the very basis of civilization. The left wants to make this sound oppressive because they are all about freaks, bums, and aliens.

Indeed, stripping away parents' rights was crucial for the progs' indoctrination plans.

I say "was crucial" because that battle is pretty much lost on our end, in the US anyway.

[Kona]

Well I was just reading about some forms of conversion therapy, and maybe it is a bad idea.

One of the most common ones is to have the gay guy watch lots of gay porn, while enjoying his favorite beverage. Now, what they don't tell the gay is that the drink has ipecac in it. The gay guy vomits profusely. The idea being he now associates vomiting with gay sex.

Another is hug therapy. Basically, the theory is that the gays did not get enough love from their dads when they were babies. Thus, hugging another grown man will make up for it. Hug the gay out.

And my favorite(although Busch Beer, gay porn and vomiting sounds fun) is horse therapy!

Horse therapy cures autism too. I'm not sure how it ungays you, but they say it works. Get a horse, ride it around, now your straight.

It made me think of this: what do you feeds gay horse? Haaaaaaaaayyyy!

Aloha!

[Scoundrel]

From the article OP cited:



Caption: "Rep. Jeffrey Currey, lead sponsor of the bill, watches the vote tally board as his colleagues applaud."

Conversion/reparative therapy may or may not be effective. There are all kinds of daffy "therapies" that are rooted in pseudoscience and wishful thinking.

Quote:

“Well, let me make it very clear to all of you here today: As a gay youth and now a gay adult, never was I broken nor in need of being fixed,” Currey said. “Being gay is not a disease, and therefore does not require a cure.”

Period. End of story. And should any mental health professional attempt to help someone to change in this regard, they will be committing a crime. (At least in Connecticut.)

There are fat acceptance people who would say "Being fat is not a disease." Many weight-loss methods either don't work at all, or don't work to the extent that they're touted. Do we then ban all programs to help people lose weight? Tell overweight people that they're not "broken," not in need of "fixing," and must accept themselves as they are?

[Off The Reservation]

This is a huge defeat for freedom of speech.

Because it is in the therapy field, they think they can regulate, but it is actually an assault on freedom of thinking / writing / speech.

[Truth Teller]

(07-20-2017 08:42 AM)Only One Man Wrote:  

If you think conversion therapy works on gay men to turn them straight you are a fucking moron. My guess would be that those "gay conversion therapy centers" are just big gay orgies. That being said, if consenting adults are willing to pay for that service and someone is willing to provide it, it should never be banned.

Anyone who supports studies showing that conversion therapy works roughly 10%-35% of the time is a moron. Right, because sexual orientation is completely fixed for all eternity.

There are issues with the studies, no doubt. For example, what do you define as "success?" Is it the cessation of homosexual desire, or is it celibacy? Are these men really gay, or are they bisexual?

However, tarring anyone who believes conversion therapy works as a moron is childish at best.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(07-20-2017 02:51 PM)ElFlaco Wrote:  

If success in conversion therapy means not engaging in gay sex anymore, that seems doable as long as there's high motivation, probably for religious reasons.

But if the idea is eliminating desires towards other men, I'm skeptical. And creating desire towards women when it isn't already present (not already bisexual in desire) seems unlikely as well.

Overall, it reminds me of spot reducing -- a nice idea not based in reality.

So let me see it from the SJW - lense:

Heterosexual tendency is fluid and can be hetero, bi or gay at any stage in life.

Homosexual tendency is 100% determined by genes despite the facts:
+ prison culture creates gay experiences,
+ Muslim culture due to gender separation and
+ homosexuals being almost 50% sexually molested in childhood -
+ there have been countless gays who actually became hetero again even losing the lust for men

Why would conversion therapy work? It would work for the same reason why unplugging yourself from porn abuse, from sexual aberrations like extreme porn, pedophilia, zoophilia - works. If you can become "perverted" in your sexuality through childhood abuse or simple degenaration, then you can also become "vanilla" again since the default mode of our species has to be heterosexual.

Now that said - there is a 30-50% subset of gay men who certainly were never abused and simply prefer to be gay. Those are in my opinion less than 1% of the population - maybe even 0,5%. There are cultures in the Amazon where there are zero gays, but those tribes have daily sex and the couples get married early on at puberty. There is not even a word for gay sex, because no one has time and energy for it.

Currently we won't find any honest discussion about the reasons of homosexuality. I would not criminalize or even ostracize homosexuality, but outright banning gay therapy is nuts. I read once a good site created by a psychologists and not a bible-thumping fanatic. It had plenty of good points in it. While I don't think that there is something inherently wrong with being gay, if a gay man wants to try and be hetero, then he should be given the help to become so.

[Scoundrel]

Although the article quoted by OP doesn't make it especially clear, the Connecticut law only applies to minors.

This makes me feel marginally better — marginally, because you know this is only one step in a larger, longer-term effort to ban all therapy of this type for everyone.

The video clip debeguiled posted with Stephen Fry got me interested to hear more from Dr. Joseph Nicolosi. Like many people who are vilified by the media, Nicolosi has many very interesting and thought-provoking things to say.

I recommend listening to this audio talk as a good introduction to his perspective:

So-called "conversion therapy" — and the view of homosexuality as a psychological aberration — is nothing new. Here is a passage from Dr. Frank Caprio's book Female Homosexuality: A Modern Study Of Lesbianism, published in 1954 (paperback pages 13-14):

Quote:

There are many misinformed who still harbor the following myths or fallacies regarding female homosexuality. They are briefly mentioned here; a more elaborate discussion of them is included in subsequent chapters.

1. That Lesbians Are Born That Way. Homosexuality is acquired, not congenital nor inherited, and represents the behavior symptom of a deep-seated and unresolved neurosis. Lesbians themselves prefer to believe that they were born that way. They delude themselves into thinking that their homosexuality is caused by a congenital constitutional defectiveness of some kind or some hormone imbalance. Dr. Clifford Allen, an authority in the field stated quite emphatically that sexual inversion is not a congenital anomaly. Here is what he said precisely: "Much has been said of the congenital and endocrine types of homosexuality, but there is not the slightest vestige of evidence that this condition is congenital or endocrine."

Today, psychiatrists know that sexual inversion is an emotional aberration — a disorder of psychological rather than genetic origin and therefore should be treated by psychological methods.

Psychoanalysis and psychotherapy are specific methods of treating lesbians. Attempts to cure homosexuals through endocrine therapy have proven futile.

2. That Lesbians Cannot Be Cured. This is another widespread fallacy. Unfortunately the overt or promiscuous type of female invert has no genuine wish to become heterosexual, or if she does seek help from the trained specialist she often sets up resistances which act as obstacles to her being cured. She prefers to repress her heterosexual component, manifests a forceful and dominant personality and enjoys seducing weaker women.

Nevertheless if the invert wants to be cured, and cooperates, the result is usually favorable.

Caprio closes his book with this statement:

Quote:

Lesbians can be cured if they are earnest in their desire to be cured. Adequate self-knowledge via psychoanalysis is essential to effect a permanent cure. Psychoanalysis and psychotherapy constitute today the most effective means of treating sexual inversion. Since lesbianism is a symptom of a personality disorder, it may be reiterated that treatment must be aimed at influencing the personality structure rather than the treatment of homosexuality as though it were a disease entity.

Note the use of the term "invert" or "inversion" when describing homosexuality. This was common parlance among professionals of the era: Normal, healthy desire is focused outward, in the direction of the "other" gender, while homosexual desire gets focused inward, in the wrong direction, so to speak. (As Nicolosi mentions, homosexuality nearly always involves some element of narcissism.)

Nicolosi calls homosexuality a gender identity disorder — in males, it involves a failure at a young age to disassociate from the mother, and form a positive emotional-psychological association with the father. The cliché of the overbearing mother and the distant/absent father apparently has a good deal of truth to it.

Today therapists like Nicolosi are demonized, yet in Caprio's time the idea of homosexuality as "normal" would have been absurd. Sex is rooted in reproductive function. For a man to feel sexual desire for other men, while feeling little or no desire for any women, makes no sense on a biological level — a fact which must have seemed utterly obvious to psychologists of the past.

[Scoundrel]

Dupe

[SlickyBoy]

(07-20-2017 08:42 AM)Only One Man Wrote:  

If you think conversion therapy works on gay men to turn them straight you are a fucking moron. My guess would be that those "gay conversion therapy centers" are just big gay orgies. That being said, if consenting adults are willing to pay for that service and someone is willing to provide it, it should never be banned.

As mentioned, the article didn't explain it very clearly, but this has to do with prohibiting therapists from conducting anything resembling "conversion therapy" on children. No idea where they draw the line on what constitutes conversion therapy or how it's expected to be policed.

On the subject of converting adults, Sigmund Freud himself did not deny it was possible, but he said (in response to a mother asking about whether it would work for her son), that it would depend upon two things - the age of the patient, and the desire of the patient to change. Hence, even he agreed a child is in a much better position to change and/or be influenced than a grown adult.

There are religious and secular groups out there who participate in this and though society at large - especially the gay community - does not respect their efforts and actively fights against them, there are probably a few success stories, though it's understandable we would never hear about that.

For lesbian woman switching around there's even more evidence that human sexuality is not immutable. Plenty of LUGs (Lesbians Until Graduation) leave college and go on to be more or less regular heterosexual (if oversexed, ruined and thousand cock stare afflicted) women later in life. I know it'd be great for Buzzfeed to announce the existence of a "gay gene" but it flat out does not exist. Even if it did, what would happen next would be the desire for parents everywhere to get their unborn child tested for the gene and aborted if it were found to have the propensity to be born a homosexual. Then what - would gays suddenly become pro life?

Quote:


...All they do is move into shitty neighborhoods and turn them into nice, safe places a decade or two later, they pay their fucking taxes and take care of their lawns, and they don't add unwanted children to the already large pool of unwanted children.

Unfortunately, the facts back up way more than that. For their population, there are far too many of them who willingly participate in child molesting - the Catholic Church scandal at its core was about a homosexual mafia moving around gay pedophiles through a network of sympathizers. They definitely do not want to be "equal" and just like everyone else - far from it. As the bill passed in CT demonstrates, they are constantly chewing at the edges of normy society in an effort to cut out exceptions and special treatments for themselves. The only one of note with a sense of reality is Milo Yiannopolis and look what they did to him.

If there is a lack of trust for the gay community that you sense on this forum, it's for a damned good reason. They are not our allies.

Quote:

As far as the criticism for them spreading STDs and AIDS, that's completely legitimate and they should be called out for that. But if you talk shit about gays for that reason and then turn around and brag about banging tons of sluts without a condom and busting inside them then you're a fucking hypocrite and are no better than the gays.

Banging sluts without a condom is foolish indeed, but HIV rates (as well as other STDs including Hepatitis) spread far worse and more rapidly among the gay community as a direct result of their stratospheric levels of promiscuity, even when they do use protection.

How many bathrooms, public parks and rest areas get raided by police because heterosexual people are meeting up there regularly for anonymous sex with random people from chat rooms? It never happens, of course. That's because heterosexual and homosexual communities and approaches to sex are utterly unalike even in these perverted times.

Throw in their latest campaign to be allowed to donate blood and you have a recipe for disaster, all because they want to strut their political stuff and see what they can get through browbeating impressionable white liberals. You know what? Fuck that - enough is enough. The blood supply is too risky to allow them to participate just because their feelings are hurt.