First Darwin and then Homos? Never!

[Boris Godunov]

Uh-oh, that's 4 gay posters on the same page. This undoubtedly must be the cabal of gay fascists who beat down all opposition that RJ once referred to...

[Rogan Josh]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Oh lord, how could you miss the point here so obviously? The study was relating to actions, and when you have 95% of those studied still engaging in homosexual acts, that shows the "therapy" to be a failure.

The point was whether or not it is possible to switch from being gay to straight. Clearly it is.

Those who don't commit acts say their sexual urges don't go away, they just supress them. Can you cite any studies of people being "cured" of their sexual orientation? Could you be converted to being attracted to men sexually over women if you tried hard enough?

Do they now? Do you have a source, or is this all insubstantiated rumour?

And yes, I think if I were in the 'right' environment for long enough and tried hard enough, I could be sexually attracted to men over women. Are you now going to tell me that you know me better than I know myself?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Rogan Josh
The point was whether or not it is possible to switch from being gay to straight. Clearly it is.

Good thing you went into physics rather than psychology. Again, the study was based on actions, not thoughts, and 95% relapsed, action-wise, into homosexual behavior. What does that tell you about the effectiveness of attempting to change sexual orientation?

Given the biological components of it as mentioned by Starchild, can you devise a logical means whereby therapy would alter an inate trait?

Regardless of all of this, I may have been mistaken about the study:

The researchers have not yet found any "cures" as a result of reparative therapy. Two male subjects initially reported that they had been cured, but later admitted that they had simply chosen to be celibate; their sexual orientation was unchanged.

Shidlo said: "If it were changeable, I think we would have seen it by now. There's been so much effort expended on it -- so many tears, so many dollars, so much energy, so many promises -- that it would have happened to someone. And if there is such a person out there, I'd love to talk to them...They tell me in retrospect, it was a sham. They were fooling themselves, or they were fooling others or both."

Do they now? Do you have a source, or is this all insubstantiated rumour?

Two outside psychiatrists were allowed to interview members of Exodus International in 1978. Of the ministry's 800 members at the time, 30 were selected by the ministry staff as having changed from exclusively homosexual to exclusively heterosexual in orientation. The researchers interviewed the 30 and determined that only 11 had really been largely "cured" of their homosexual behavior; they had remained celibate. Eight of the 11 continued to have a homosexual or bisexual orientation; they still reported homosexual dreams, fantasies and/or impulses. However, they have chosen to be celibate. If the rate of success is defined as the percentage of clients with a homosexual orientation who became heterosexual, then this survey found a less than 0.4% success rate.

Now, considering the "success" rate of the therapy, of those 3 remaining folks, which do you think is most likely:

A) they weren't really cured of their urges, but maintained they were because that's what they want to believe.
B) They maybe had not been homosexual in the first place, but confused about their own orientation at the time they began the therapy and were really heterosexual to begin with.
C) They were somehow "cured" through therapy of something that is shown to have significant biological components?

Also:

Two of the 11 should not be counted among their successes. They were Michael Bussee and Gary Cooper, who were among the many founders of Exodus in 1976. They fell in love and were united in a commitment ceremony after the above study was completed. As shown in the documentary movie One Nation Under God they later criticized their own organization and other ministries for gays as fraudulent. They said that the Exodus program was "ineffective...not one person was healed." They stated that the programs tend to increase guilt and a sense of personal failure among those who are trying to "sexually re-orient" themselves through reparative therapy. Many had suicidal ideation after they failed.

And yes, I think if I were in the 'right' environment for long enough and tried hard enough, I could be sexually attracted to men over women. Are you now going to tell me that you know me better than I know myself?

No, I'm going to tell you that mental health officials and people who have actually underwent such therapy know better than you do, since you haven't even attempted it. Lots of people think that if they tried hard enough, they can read minds, fly or such. Do I need to be inside their heads to know better?

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Uh-oh, that's 4 gay posters on the same page. This undoubtedly must be the cabal of gay fascists who beat down all opposition that RJ once referred to...

My Chanel handbag for men leapt to your defence, along with my battery of Wildean quips.

Attack one homo, you attack us all, Vive la France, Egalite, Fraternite, Homosexualite!

Must calm down- have to go and perform stereotypical homosexual activity- listen to show tunes, watch a Judy Garland film, become head of the F.B.I. , or a British High Court judge.

[Arrian]

Damn near all of this is irrelevent.

Ben & Rogan:

Ask yourselves - truely think about it, please - why you oppose gay marriage.

I have, at times in the past, found myself realizing, mid-argument, that my reasoning was something I'd constructed to back up a position I had that was rooted in emotion - or to define it better, BELIEF. I believed something... I felt something, but hadn't really examined why. I'd then gotten into a debate about it, and been forced to defend my position... which resulted in what I think you guys are doing: pulling out any argument you can think of, regardless of its soundness, and throwing it into the breach. The alternative, of course, is to admit that your position is based on belief, not logic. This you have thus far refused to do, which I think is simply denial.

I do not find any of the arguments presented against gay marriage (or, to clarify - whatever the straights get form the state, the gays get from the state. Whatever it's called, it's the same for all) thus far persuasive. Some of them are downright comical:

- HIV/AIDS. Please anybody can transmit HIV. The higher transmission rate of anal sex is irrelevent to this discussion, given that it is but one form of gay sex, and it is a form that lesbians do not practice (at least not w/o a strapon ) and one that straights do (not all, but some). Further, banning gay marriage does next to nothing to stop gay sex.

"Benifit to society" of hetero marriage - this argument (if you can call it that) boils down to "kids are good." But, as has been repeatedly pointed out, many straight couples do not have kids, for one reason or another. Any other benifit from marriage would work for gays as well as straights - people tend to do well in stable, happy relationships.

"Conversion" - This one is all about "OH MY GOD, IF WE LET THE FAGS MARRY, EVERYONE WILL TURN GAY!!! Maybe even my kid :scary: " To which I respond "no, I'm quite secure in my heterosexuality... never in a million years could I find another man attractive." Letting gays marry will not increase the rate of homosexuality. It will most likely increase the rate of OPEN homosexuality, but that's not a problem for me. Oh, what was the other argument... was it that allowing them to marry "sanctions that lifestyle?" To which I respond: fine by me. If your holy book tells you otherwise, that's your problem.

-Arrian

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Uh-oh, that's 4 gay posters on the same page. This undoubtedly must be the cabal of gay fascists who beat down all opposition that RJ once referred to...

We could call ourselves the Fab Four Militia.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Two outside psychiatrists were allowed to interview members of Exodus International in 1978. Of the ministry's 800 members at the time, 30 were selected by the ministry staff as having changed from exclusively homosexual to exclusively heterosexual in orientation. The researchers interviewed the 30 and determined that only 11 had really been largely "cured" of their homosexual behavior; they had remained celibate. Eight of the 11 continued to have a homosexual or bisexual orientation; they still reported homosexual dreams, fantasies and/or impulses. However, they have chosen to be celibate. If the rate of success is defined as the percentage of clients with a homosexual orientation who became heterosexual, then this survey found a less than 0.4% success rate.

Now, considering the "success" rate of the therapy, of those 3 remaining folks, which do you think is most likely:

A) they weren't really cured of their urges, but maintained they were because that's what they want to believe.
B) They maybe had not been homosexual in the first place, but confused about their own orientation at the time they began the therapy and were really heterosexual to begin with.
C) They were somehow "cured" through therapy of something that is shown to have significant biological components?

All the more evidence that sexual orienation cannot change -- no matter how much you would like to believe you have "successfully" changed under heterosexist conformity pressure.

[Starchild]

Originally posted by MrFun


We could call ourselves the Fab Four Militia.

[Starchild]

Originally posted by MrFun


We could call ourselves the Fab Four Militia.

[MrFun]

YEAH!!!!!!! Bring it on, homophobes!

[MrFun]

Here is a paragraph or two from another article by Excerpted from Psychology 7th edition by David G. Myers, copyright 2004 by Worth Publishers, New York:

What does it feel like to be homosexual in a heterosexual culture? If you are heterosexual, one way to understand is to imagine how you would feel if you were ostracized or fired for openly admitting or displaying your feelings toward someone of the other sex; if you overheard people making crude jokes about heterosexual people; if most movies, TV shows, and advertisements portrayed (or implied) homosexuality; and if your family members were pleading with you to change your heterosexual life-style and to enter into a homosexual marriage.

Facing such reactions, homosexual people often struggle with their sexual orientation. They may at first try to ignore or deny their desires, hoping they will go away. But they don't. Then they may try to change, through psychotherapy, willpower, or prayer. Personal values affect sexual orientation less than they affect other forms of sexual behavior. Compared with people who rarely attend church, for example, those who attend regularly are one-third as likely to have cohabited before marriage and to report having had many fewer sexual partners. But (if male) they are just as likely to be homosexual (Smith, 1998).
But the feelings typically persist, as do those of heterosexual people—who are similarly incapable of becoming homosexual (Haldeman, 1994, 2002). Most of today's psychologists therefore view sexual orientation as neither willfully chosen nor willfully changed. Sexual orientation in some ways is like handedness: Most people are one way, some the other. A very few are truly ambidextrous. Regardless, the way one is endures.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by MrFun


YEAH!!!!!!! Bring it on, homophobes!

We're moving into Autumn here (although it was 33 degrees and sunny yesterday) so I'd have to swap Starchild's admittedly stylish lilac avenger outfit for something more appropriately seasonal, in earth tones.

Or just do what I always do, and when in doubt wear the Melbourne all-weather shade, basic black.

' I'd rather be black than gay, because when you're black you don't have to tell your mother.'

Charles Pierce


' Wickedness is a myth invented by good people to account for the curious attractiveness of others.'

Oscar Wilde, 'Phrases and Philosophies for the Use of the Young' 1894

[MrFun]

But Starchild left me and Boris out -- where is our cartoon profile??

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by MrFun
But Starchild left me and Boris out -- where is our cartoon profile??

Clearly it's blatant homophobia on Starchild's part.

[MrFun]