Political Crossfire Forums

[F'losrix]

George W Bush wrote: Ultimately, I agree with the point that a person needs to be happy.

As far as the experts, professionals or gurus (if you will) - none of that matters.

No one (let me repeat, NO ONE) knows anyone better than the individual of themselves. You can be Dr. GOD and I would still trust a person's subjective feelings more valid than the Dr. The point I want to make is that no one can say better than yourself wether or not they are gay, bi or indifferent.

You admitted that someone can be confused. For whatever reason, they have these feelings towards the same sex. For that, they should seek therapy as you suggested.
What should the therapist say? Uh, your feelings are normal because the APA has not made it ok for me to say otherwise?
What, heterosexuals aren't allowed to feel any same-sex attraction now without being considered abnormal? Apparently you aren't up to speed on the fact that no one is 100% same-sex/opposite-sex oriented. Gay doesn't mean being attracted only to the same sex, it means (at least for most of us) having a considerably lopsided strength of attraction toward others of our own sex. The distinction between gay vs. bisexual is the degree to which a person feels a stronger pull toward one sex or the other.

A good therapist will help the person to reach the conclusion on their own of whether they're gay, bi or straight - without trying to steer them one way or the other.

And your apparent hostility towards the APA betrays something more to us.

[George W Bush]

Skeptical Mystic wrote: George W Bush wrote: Ultimately, I agree with the point that a person needs to be happy.

As far as the experts, professionals or gurus (if you will) - none of that matters.

No one (let me repeat, NO ONE) knows anyone better than the individual of themselves. You can be Dr. GOD and I would still trust a person's subjective feelings more valid than the Dr. The point I want to make is that no one can say better than yourself wether or not they are gay, bi or indifferent.

You admitted that someone can be confused. For whatever reason, they have these feelings towards the same sex. For that, they should seek therapy as you suggested.
What should the therapist say? Uh, your feelings are normal because the APA has not made it ok for me to say otherwise?
What, heterosexuals aren't allowed to feel any same-sex attraction now without being considered abnormal? Apparently you aren't up to speed on the fact that no one is 100% same-sex/opposite-sex oriented. Gay doesn't mean being attracted only to the same sex, it means (at least for most of us) having a considerably lopsided strength of attraction toward others of our own sex. The distinction between gay vs. bisexual is the degree to which a person feels a stronger pull toward one sex or the other.

A good therapist will help the person to reach the conclusion on their own of whether they're gay, bi or straight - without trying to steer them one way or the other.

And your apparent hostility towards the APA betrays something more to us.

This started because you rejected NARTH as this ominous organization with Falwellian intentions of making everyone hetero.
Now, you are saying I am hostile to the APA?
You get ever more militant in your posts, Skeptic.
I am going to pretend you are not militant and disregard your accusation against me and the APA.

What you need to realise is there is the common ground of personal happiness endeavor.
If you do not have such feelings, remind me again. Otherwise, I will assume we agree that people should be able to choose either the services offered by NARTH or a therapist, or not. This translates into: do what makes one happy.

It would be ignorant to assume you have much more knowledge than an organization founded by well-educated men/women and the research that has made plenty of people happy.

That being said, I have no problem with someone going to a therapist and coming out gay, as long as it makes them happy. Theres the theme. Happiness.
I rejected APA on the grounds that they reject findings in people who have gone through "reparative therapy" and come out straight and happy. Simply put, they ignore their intention of helping people achieve happiness by rejecting the claims of reparative therapy patients that they are actually feeling good.

But, that is not to say that therapy cannot help. Obviously, therapists eventually make decisions on their own as opposed to the regimented diagnosis indicated by the APA. So, there is ray of light in considering therapy actually will help.

I dont reject the APA, except in cases where they say reparative therapy doesnt work. I support NARTH in their principal of wanting people to be happy. I support APA in wanting people to be happy.

There.

[F'losrix]

George W Bush wrote: This started because you rejected NARTH as this ominous organization with Falwellian intentions of making everyone hetero.
Given the connections of the people running it, I remain unconvinced as to their alleged good intentions.

George W Bush wrote: Now, you are saying I am hostile to the APA?
On this issue, it's my opinion that your hostility to the APA is self evident. But others are quite welcome to form their own opinion on the question by reviewing what you've said.

George W Bush wrote: You get ever more militant in your posts, Skeptic.
Funny, I don't remember making a call for people to take up armed resistance to NARTH or ex-gays, or to prevent people from seeking out and using their services. Watch the mischaracterizations - you'll end up on my ignore list with the privileged few who have supremely annoyed me with purposeful distortions of my statements and personal attacks on my character.

George W Bush wrote: I am going to pretend you are not militant and disregard your accusation against me and the APA.
Read below - it doesn't look like you disregarded anything, to me.

George W Bush wrote: What you need to realise is there is the common ground of personal happiness endeavor.
Which leads us once again back to the question of whether NARTH is really out to promote personal happiness, or whether they're a wing of some anti-gay political movement promoting the idea that all homosexuals can and should change their orientation for the happiness of greater society, not necessarily that of the individual. I'm not convinced that their motives are pure, and you're unlikely to persuade me, given what we know about the connections of the people running the organization. I simply refuse to fall for this 'we're only trying to help people' garbage.

George W Bush wrote: I will assume we agree that people should be able to choose either the services offered by NARTH or a therapist, or not. This translates into: do what makes one happy.
I've never stated nor implied that someone shouldn't have the freedom to make that choice. What I have done is give voice to my not unfounded suspicions about the nature of the organization you're relying upon, and questioned the veracity of claims that gay people can change their orientation.

Again, you've made an attempt to further mischaracterize my stance on the issue. Strike two.

George W Bush wrote: It would be ignorant to assume you have much more knowledge than an organization founded by well-educated men/women and the research that has made plenty of people happy.
It would be ignorant for you to assume that having a degree makes one wise, that their research is unbiased, and to ignore the fact that they have a very low success rate.

George W Bush wrote: That being said, I have no problem with someone going to a therapist and coming out gay, as long as it makes them happy. Theres the theme. Happiness.
And the point I and others have tried to get across to you all along is that most of the people who attempt to change their orientation via reparative therapy fail and end up more messed up than they were before.

George W Bush wrote: I rejected APA on the grounds that they reject findings in people who have gone through "reparative therapy" and come out straight and happy. Simply put, they ignore their intention of helping people achieve happiness by rejecting the claims of reparative therapy patients that they are actually feeling good.
But have you made any attempt at all to understand why the APA rejects the methods used and why they find the outcome questionable? It doesn't seem so to me.

George W Bush wrote: But, that is not to say that therapy cannot help. Obviously, therapists eventually make decisions on their own as opposed to the regimented diagnosis indicated by the APA. So, there is ray of light in considering therapy actually will help.
More like a flashlight with dead batteries, but nevermind.

George W Bush wrote: I dont reject the APA, except in cases where they say reparative therapy doesnt work. I support NARTH in their principal of wanting people to be happy. I support APA in wanting people to be happy.
What you support is an organization with suspect alliances promoting a political anti-gay agenda, disguised as trying to help people. What you reject are the findings of an organization with considerably more collective professional experience than NARTH on the question of how best to treat people who are struggling with how to manage their personal orientation.

Are we done yet? Obviously there is no room for agreement between us on this issue.

[Enoch]

George W Bush wrote: Skeptical Mystic wrote: George W Bush wrote: Ultimately, I agree with the point that a person needs to be happy.

As far as the experts, professionals or gurus (if you will) - none of that matters.

No one (let me repeat, NO ONE) knows anyone better than the individual of themselves. You can be Dr. GOD and I would still trust a person's subjective feelings more valid than the Dr. The point I want to make is that no one can say better than yourself wether or not they are gay, bi or indifferent.

You admitted that someone can be confused. For whatever reason, they have these feelings towards the same sex. For that, they should seek therapy as you suggested.
What should the therapist say? Uh, your feelings are normal because the APA has not made it ok for me to say otherwise?
What, heterosexuals aren't allowed to feel any same-sex attraction now without being considered abnormal? Apparently you aren't up to speed on the fact that no one is 100% same-sex/opposite-sex oriented. Gay doesn't mean being attracted only to the same sex, it means (at least for most of us) having a considerably lopsided strength of attraction toward others of our own sex. The distinction between gay vs. bisexual is the degree to which a person feels a stronger pull toward one sex or the other.

A good therapist will help the person to reach the conclusion on their own of whether they're gay, bi or straight - without trying to steer them one way or the other.

And your apparent hostility towards the APA betrays something more to us.

This started because you rejected NARTH as this ominous organization with Falwellian intentions of making everyone hetero.
Now, you are saying I am hostile to the APA?
You get ever more militant in your posts, Skeptic.
I am going to pretend you are not militant and disregard your accusation against me and the APA.

What you need to realise is there is the common ground of personal happiness endeavor.
If you do not have such feelings, remind me again. Otherwise, I will assume we agree that people should be able to choose either the services offered by NARTH or a therapist, or not. This translates into: do what makes one happy.

It would be ignorant to assume you have much more knowledge than an organization founded by well-educated men/women and the research that has made plenty of people happy.

That being said, I have no problem with someone going to a therapist and coming out gay, as long as it makes them happy. Theres the theme. Happiness.
I rejected APA on the grounds that they reject findings in people who have gone through "reparative therapy" and come out straight and happy. Simply put, they ignore their intention of helping people achieve happiness by rejecting the claims of reparative therapy patients that they are actually feeling good.

But, that is not to say that therapy cannot help. Obviously, therapists eventually make decisions on their own as opposed to the regimented diagnosis indicated by the APA. So, there is ray of light in considering therapy actually will help.

I dont reject the APA, except in cases where they say reparative therapy doesnt work. I support NARTH in their principal of wanting people to be happy. I support APA in wanting people to be happy.

There. All I really want to know is how you can consider NARTH to be reputable in the "reparative therapy" realm, but disregard the APA.

[JDHURF]

NARTH is a fringe group that is rejected by the American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, American Counseling Association, National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of Social Workers.

This is not merely about the APA alone - although your distrust of the APA is not only unwarranted but absurd - and the rejection of NARTH by virtually every legitimate organization dealing with this subject is – I would think – extremely suggestive.
George W Bush wrote: As far as the experts, professionals or gurus (if you will) - none of that matters.
Incorrect.
George W Bush wrote: No one (let me repeat, NO ONE) knows anyone better than the individual of themselves. You can be Dr. GOD and I would still trust a person's subjective feelings more valid than the Dr.
Preposterous. If we were to apply this reasoning in accordance to other psychological and/or physical attributes it would be dangerous. You are claiming that you would trust the “subjective feelings” of an individual extremely distressed and suicidal over that of a trained and experienced doctor? That is simply unreasonable.
George W Bush wrote: The point I want to make is that no one can say better than yourself wether or not they are gay, bi or indifferent.
You accept the “subjective feelings” of people so long as they claim to be sure about their subjective feelings, yet you reject the subjective feelings of individuals who claim to be confused? I doubt you reject the reality that many individuals experience confusion regarding their sexual orientation in which case, clearly, they cannot definitively claim to be gay, bi, straight or “indifferent” (whatever you meant by that) because they are confused and individuals who are confused are, by definition, not able to say – better than everyone else – what their sexual orientation is. That is why they need legitimate professional counseling – which the APA provides – rather than therapy where their sexual orientation will be viewed as a “disturbance” that needs remediation – which NARTH does. The largest difference between the APA and NARTH is that NARTH works with the egregious assumption that homosexuality is a disorder and must be treated no matter what the individuals “subjective feelings” are, whereas the APA will simply help guide the individual through counseling without any such assumptions in order that the individual may then realize for themselves what their orientation truly is whether the individual realizes that they are homosexual, bisexual or heterosexual. The APA would help any individual become happy under any premise be they gay, straight or bi whereas NARTH only tries to “help” people become happy under the explicit premise that homosexuality is a disorder and that their sexual orientation must undergo remediation; the APA will help one become happy regardless of their sexual orientation and NARTH will only help one become happy if they “treat” their homosexuality as a disorder and “become” or “choose to be” heterosexual.
George W Bush wrote: You admitted that someone can be confused. For whatever reason, they have these feelings towards the same sex. For that, they should seek therapy as you suggested.
What should the therapist say? Uh, your feelings are normal because the APA has not made it ok for me to say otherwise?
The therapist not only should say but would say – upon a client allowing them the information that they may be confused about their sexual orientation and that they are attracted to the same sex – that this is normal. Your notion that homosexuality is normal when individuals are adamant and secure about their sexuality but abnormal when individuals express confusion and distress over their sexual orientation is irrational.