The Hatewatch blog is managed by the staff of the Intelligence Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, an Alabama-based civil rights organization.

Ex-Gay Advocates: ‘Change’ Depends on the Definition

By Ryan Lenz on January 31, 2012 - 12:14 pm, Posted in Anti-LGBT

It depends on what your definition of is … is.

We all recall President Bill Clinton’s parsing of words during the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

Now, the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), composed of psychoanalysts and other therapists who believe that gay men and lesbians suffer can be “cured” through therapy, is engaging in a similar two-step.

NARTH, in a new statement on its website, argues that any opposition to the idea that a person’s sexuality can change through treatment is based on a faulty understanding of what “change” means.

According to the statement, “Those who are highly pessimistic regarding change in sexual orientation appear to have assumed a categorical view of change, which is neither in keeping with how sexual orientation has been defined in the literature nor with how change is conceptualized for nearly all other psychological challenges. … With this in mind, NARTH remains committed to protecting the rights of clients with unwanted same-sex attractions to pursue change as well as the rights of clinicians to provide such psychological care.”

So let’s get this straight –– change is possible, and NARTH can offer it, but let’s all agree on what change means? Confused? So are we.

What is unclear about the statement is whether it is a defiant manifesto to address a sociopolitical climate in which the change it promises is under increased scrutiny, or a clarification for prospective patients on what to expect from reparative therapy. Maybe it’s both. Either way, one thing is abundantly clear: NARTH remains defiantly proud and categorically committed its dubious premise.

“Change” is possible, NARTH says –– so long as we all know what change means.

  • Bob Forapples

    Dr. NE Whitehead has shown conclusively in his webpage at mygenes.co.nz that nobody is born gay. Even identical twins (where there is any homosexuality at all!) will 8 out of 10 times have only one gay twin. There is no genetic cause for homosexuality!

  • Kurai

    AFTAH is notable for its posting of the utterly discredited work of Paul Cameron (of the Family Research Institute; see below), who has claimed that gays and lesbians live vastly shorter lives than heterosexuals. Among the Cameron propaganda published by AFTAH are 2007 claims that gays and lesbians in Norway and Denmark live 24 fewer years than heterosexuals. Reviewing that claim, Danish epidemiologist Morten Frisch found that it had no scientific basis. LaBarbera himself, in 2002, compared the alleged dangers of homosexuality to those of “smoking, alcohol and drug abuse.” Similarly, AFTAH’s website carries essays describing homosexuality as a “lethal behavior addiction,” a “dangerous” practice that is “neither normal nor benign.”

  • Kurai

    Funinsnow

    First off I’ve noticed that you are comparing homosexuality and sex change to drug abuse. I have a boyfriend, you see, and last time I checked, being the way I am hasn’t blackened my lungs, nor has it permanently clouded my mind. It hasn’t made me steal from peopl just so I could pay for more of my “Drug” either. As a matter of fact, it has had no adverse effects on my health whatsoever. So please drop that.

    Anywho, onward.

    From what I remember, as a child, I was never sexually abused at all. Neither was my lover, Noah. Although I will agree that some homosexuality is caused by such things, but it isn’t always the case.
    And no, narrow mindedness is never okay.
    Love, care and acceptance is what’s okay.
    But let’s say, theoretically, they came up with a cure for homosexuality. I would not have it done, period. While I would respect another persons decision to have the procedure done. Because being gay/lesbian/bisexual isn’t just about the physical stuff, it is about loving who you want to love, it’s about the emotional feelings between two human beings, no matter their gender.

    But… I feel that what I have said is futile, Judging by your last comments, and how stubborn you are. So let me present you with an alternate rebuttal.

    If the cure was made to stop homosexuality, it would be up to someone’s personal choice, along with your celibacy idea. Homosexuality will never go away, because if gays and lebians were forced into those things it would be unconstitutional.
    Therefore, the government pwns you.

    With respect,
    Kurai

  • The other Dave

    that sex is mainly supposed to be about the woman pleasuring the man & that once a woman hits menopause, it’s best to not have sex with her.”
    Funinsnow does not deserve the love of any intelligent women.He is a “HINO” Heterosexual in name only. Do not try to re assign your preference,nobody else wants your love either. Just repeat that to yourself a dozen times.

  • http://twitter.com/AronL Aron

    It’s amazing. He admits his answer is weak. And yet he still thinks it’s the right one BECAUSE HE SAYS SO.

    Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you a textbook example of circular logic. I would expect nothing less from Funinsnow.

  • funinsnow

    Aron, this may sound like a weak answer, but I believe it’s good to be narrow minded against things such as gay/lesbian activities & sex change maimings. Sometimes the narrow minded view is the right view. So being homophobic is a good thing just it’s good to be against sex change mutilations & crack smoking.

  • http://Twitter.com/AronL Aron

    It’s a good thing we have Funinsnow to regulate our morality for us! Otherwise, we would have no other choice but to be TOLERENT OF OTHERS and we can’t have that, now, can we?

  • funinsnow

    The other Dave, yes, my views are crap to people like you, but we won’t say much which is significantly new. Whether it’s SPLC, singer Lady Gaga, shock jock Howard Stern, Robin Quivers, Huffington Post, etc. they’ll repeat the same information on gays/lesbians & transexuality in their apologism. What I say will be repeat. If you see the talks surrounding homosexuality, they end up saying the same thing again & again. The SPLC can create many other topics surrounding homosexuality & we will say the same thing again. My guess theotherDave, is that you don’t have much new things to add.

    Richard L, can’t say anymore surrounding repair therapy because we’ll just repeat what has been said. With transexuality, yes, most of the patients who have this mutilation consent to it, but I don’t believe sex changes should be a choice. If a man believed he was a dog, I would oppose a Dr.trying to surgically alter the man’s voice to make him bark like a dog or surgically put a tail on him & I’d also oppose a Dr. trying to make a dog a man. If a Black person believed he was White or Viceversa, I’d oppose a surgeon trying to Whiten or Darken his or her skin. Just as there are men who think they’re women, there are Blacks who think they’re White. What they must do with Gender Dysphoria (GID) is try to cure or @least better treat GID based on available science & they must not do sex changes, even if the patient wants it just as it would be wrong for a Dr. to amputate the healthy limbs of some1 who thinks they have no arms. Maybe people have GID because of birth defect just as people who have ethnic identity disorder. With GID, science has collaborated with rather than treat a disorder. Sex changes have been around since the 1950s & are a sad mutilation of science. Incidentally, I have no problem if they abolish vasectomies & tubal ligations as there’s sufficient birth control such as the pill, condoms & Rhythm, etc. Science/medicine often ends up going into things it shouldn’t be doing such as cloning. Sex changes are a sad eg. of medicine doing what it shouldn’t.

  • The other Dave

    Yes you will go endlessly on with this. You have found as long as you are polite you can go endlessly over and over the same crap again.

  • Richard L

    funinsnow,

    I’ll also respond to your other question, the one about transsexualism and gender-reassignment surgery. You ask if I oppose such surgeries? Yes and no, depending on the context in which they are being used.

    I oppose the use of these surgeries to ‘correct’ the genitals of infants born with ambiguous sex organs or characteristics, as such surgeries have typically been conducted without the consent of the parents and without the child being informed until much later that the surgeries were conducted. As medical understanding of intersex people has grown, this has become less common, but the horror stories continue well into the present.

    However, I support the use of these surgeries where requested by adult individuals. Transsexual people are not being mutilated against their will by doctors, those that have the surgeries feel it necessary to correct the dichotomy between their brain and self conception of gender, and their physical sex characteristics. Moreover, the majority of those who undergo these surgeries later report increased self-esteem, well being, and happiness.

    It’s certainly not for everyone, nor necessarily for all trans folks, but they have the right to make their own decisions about their own bodies, and they are better situated to make those decisions than you or I.

    The world of human sex and sexuality, and for that matter animal sex and sexuality in general, is far more complicated than heterosexual monogamous males and females. If you want to be a monogamous heterosexual man, that’s fine, and I absolutely support your right to be that way. But if you attempt to force me or others to fit into your comfort zone, you’re in for a lot of disappointment.

    You’ve made it clear that you won’t accept any science that disagrees with your position. I’ll make it clear now that without seeing the actual study and being able to verify its methods, I do not trust researchers associated with NARTH or any other ex-gay group, although verifying a researcher’s work/methods/record is a generally good idea all around.

    Nice having a civil discourse about the topic with you.

  • Richard L

    funinsnow,

    It seems at last we find an area where we can agree. I am 100% opposed to sexual harassment/assault, whether verbal or physical, whether committed by a man against another man, a man against a woman, a woman against a man, woman against woman, etc. If someone makes a (verbal) sexual advance toward another person, and that person refuses them or makes clear their lack of interest, than it is harassment for that someone to continue forcing their attentions upon the other person. And if that person physically accosts the individual, then yes, they’ve committed sexual harassment.

    We differ, I think, in what we consider to be appropriate response. If someone is coming onto you in an unwanted fashion verbally, than no matter how obnoxious they’re being, violence is inappropriate. If they physically grope you, than responding with a slap or punch or shove is still inappropriate, but more understandable. It is, however, excessive to beat someone up because they groped you, and this is true regardless of the opinions of a jury. It is up to the jury to determine how excessive the violent response was. The actions are still wrong. If you want to ‘punish’ someone for sexual assault or harassment, take it to the courts. Violent retribution is neither legal nor justified save in the last extreme of self-defense.

    As for NARTH, I never stated that the organization forced individuals into their therapy, although they do their best to convince gay individuals and their family that such therapy is desirable, effective, and/or necessary. The sad fact is that while some ex-gays may be genuine in reporting that the therapy helped them (and we’d likely disagree as to why and how), most do not experience any change in orientation, and for others the experience is quite harrowing. These procedures are also not scientific, and are usually faith based in nature. Still, if that’s what the person wants to try, than it’s up to them, as long as the groups in question are honest about the efficiency and success rates of their therapies. They frequently are unwilling to be forthcoming with such data.

    Disturbing at best, however, are cases where the parents of a youth force them to attend such therapy sessions against their will. This can have very negative outcomes for the youth involved, up to and including suicide.

  • funinsnow

    Not to endlessly go on with this, but something to elaborate regarding Richard L comments on straight men who harass women. Richard L, there are many cases where a man got hit in the face by a woman, her husband or boyfriend esp. in a pub after the man (often drunk) grabbed the woman’s butt or boobs against will after which the woman slaps the man or tells her husband or boyfriend who beats up the man. As I see it, the man committed a crime for which he got bashed. In fact, there have been cases where a woman has accused a man of sex abuse, rape, etc. & the man ended up being beaten up only to later be learned the woman made it up. In the 2006 Duke rape case, there were people prepared to beat up the accused men only to later be learned the woman lied about being raped. In 2011, there was a riot against a Gypsy neighborhood in Italy after a teenage girl said that 2 Gypsy men raped her. After the riots, the girl admitted she lied about being raped because she didn’t want her parents to know she was having sex with her boyfriend.

    Richard L, the fact is that sex abuse by men against women is taken so seriously that it has even in some cases resulted in innocent men being victims of violence after being accused. With gay bashings, I’m against starting fights. If a gay is minding his business & not bothering others, then leave him alone. But if a gay is going to be anti-social such as harass or commit assault&battery by grabbing butt or groin against will, then a man has a right to use any just force to end the abuse. Whether the man reacted with just or excessive force is a jury topic, but the man did react to a crime the gay did. If a gay is going to harass others in the bathroom as Larry Craig did, then that must be punished. The bathroom is the place to use the toilet & wash up. Anyhow Richard L, you & I will differ on homosexuality/lesbianism as I see something wrong with gay/lesbian activities. But I hope Richard L that you are against harassment, assault&battery & sex abuse when it’s gay in nature in the ways described.

  • funinsnow

    Richard L, reading your post on transexuality, do you see anything wrong with surgically maiming a man to make him a fake woman or in Chastity Bono’s case viceversa? I do as does Justina. Sex change is a sad science waste which happens because they know how to & which must be abolished. Anyhow, look forward to your views to both my posts.

  • funinsnow

    Richard L, with your 1st paragraph unless it’s self-defense, it’s a crime to grab some1′s butt, groin or boobs against will. It’s assault&battery if intent isn’t sexual to something more serious if intent is sexual such as sex abuse or even attempted homosexual rape. I hope you don’t believe that if a gay grabs a man’s butt or groin against will, that the man just put up with this crime. You can call it a ‘pass’ but it’s @least assault&battery. If a man were to grab a woman’s butt or boobs against will, the man would probably be in jail & more men are in jail for this than rape. & there are many cases where men have been bashed after they grabbed a woman’s butt or boobs against will, so most opinions aren’t changing as there are far more cases of this-if the woman, her husband or boyfriend beat up the man who did this, many wouldn’t sympathize with the man as they’d say he got beaten up after he did something he had no right to. So if a gay is going to grab a man’s butt or groin against his will after which the man bashes the gay, the man did so in overreaction to @ least criminal assault&battery the gay did. Yes, it maybe excessive, but that’s why juries decide this after hearing both the prosecution & defense. If it’s a murder trial, then a jury will decide what degree to convict on such as Manslaughter rather than 2nd Degree Murder. There’s no need to put up with sexual harassment whether it’s straight or gay in nature. To repeat, I think gay/lesbian sexual activities whether it’s consent or forced are bad in & of itself.

    With your second points, the criticism of Dr. Paul Drummond Cameron, Dr. NE Whitehead & Dr. Nicolosi. With Dr. Nicolosi, he doesn’t force teenagers into repair therapy. Dr. Joseph N. Nicolosi has told parents who forcibly bring their gay/lesbian teens in that in order for repair therapy to happen, the teen has to want this. Dr. Nicolosi has said that few of the teens who are forcibly brought in by their parents stay. What Dr. JN Nicolosi does is tell the teens his views & then have the teen decide for himself/herself. If some1 doesn’t want repair therapy, then there’s nothing which can be done. I believe in free will & unless it’s confining a dangerous person in a mental asylum, I oppose forcing people into medical/psychological care. If a gay/lesbian person doesn’t want repair therapy, then that’s their choice & Dr. Nicolosi doesn’t force them into this as for repair therapy for gay/lesbian sexuality to happen, the gay has to want it for himself.

    Yes, Dr. JN Nicolosi & Dr. Julie Harren-Hamilton are both NARTH leaders who make money from repair therapy & yes NARTH is a business. Dr. Nicolosi & Dr. Julie Harren-Hamilton have said that gays & lesbians who don’t believe they’re being helped by repair therapy discontinue. But there are gays & lesbians who believe they’ve been better helped & some think they’ve gone straight after repair therapy. There are drug junkies & drunkards who aren’t helped by repair therapy but there are some who are. Since you mention money, affirmation therapists also make money by affirming gay/lesbian sexuality so they’re also in it for business. Drs. who do sex changes are in it to make money & you’ve read my view in abolishing sex change maimings-the American Medical Association (AMA) apologism for sex changes is a main reason why I think the AMA is evil as they support surgically mutilating people to make them fake members of opposite sex & sex changes are worse than homosexuality. Dr. Paul Drummond Cameron, Dr. Julie Harren-Hamilton & Dr. Nicolosi believe sex changes are worse than homosexuality. As it’s about homosexuality, neutrality to repeat has long been lost on homosexuality. Yes, Dr. Paul Drummond Cameron, Dr. Julie Harren-Hamilton, etc. have their biases against homosexuality but there’s nothing wrong with that esp. as I share their views.

  • Richard L

    Justina,

    I’m not sure whether I should focus on the first part of your post, or the rather incomprehensible rant that follows it, but let’s start with the part where you were at least attempting to be civil.

    The difference between homosexual sex, and the other wrong activities that you equate it with, is the issue of consent and harm. Promiscuity seems out of place on your list for the same reasons.

    If you steal from someone, or rape them, or murder them, you are by definition doing harm to them against their will, and these acts are generally considered to be wrong due to the harm they inflict. What separates rape from sex is that lack of consent. What separates stealing from someone from being given a gift, is lack of consent. Generally speaking, people likewise don’t consent to being murdered or assaulted or cheated on by their spouses.

    And then we get to homosexual sex. Can homosexual sex be committed without consent? Of course. But so can heterosexual sex. What is wrong with your position is that you arbitrarily assign homosexuality (or promiscuity) to the category of harmful, in all circumstances, even when those acts are committed safely and with consent from all parties.

    Possibly, as a Christian, you rely upon the idea of “sin” to justify your categorization. That’s a cop out unless you can explain why some of the sins in your religious tradition are evil and others mentioned in your holy text are now considered inconsequential. It’s a cop out unless you’re prepared to explain why things like polygamy and slavery, accepted in your holy text, are to be considered condemnable in the present. It is also irrelevant, because the United States is not a theocracy, and you have no right to demand others abide by the tenants of your faith.

    Finally, transsexuals are not sellouts to feminism, you are. In your hatred and disgust at those different that you, you ally with the same organizations and the same traditions that have so long denied women agency, equality and opportunity. You seek to define for marginalized groups a system of right and wrong that robs them of agency, of dignity, and of legal protections. The next generation of feminists, and the better part of the previous generation of feminists, have recognized that and continue to work toward a more tolerant and equal society.

    I am proud to call them allies. Are you proud to be slinging homophobic slurs and associated consenting sex with rape and murder?

  • Richard L

    funinsnow,

    Beating or attacking a man for making a drunken pass at you isn’t a mere overreaction, and far more fits the definition of assault that patting someone on the ass. The proper response to sexual harassment, of any kind, is not violence. I find myself imagining a world in which women responded to drunken flirting and sexual harassment from straight men the way those straight men think is an appropriate response to being flirted with by gay men. Chances are they’d change their opinions pretty quick.

    But back to your experts, with an apology that it took so long for me to respond. It doesn’t surprise me, given your insistence that the AMA made an evil decision when it questioned the evidence that homosexuality was a defect and found it lacking, that you’d rely upon scientists with the same views. Dr. Hamilton and Dr. Nicolosi, for the uninformed, have both been strongly associated with NARTH during their careers. Their income and relevance has depended upon peddling the idea to parents that their darling girls and boys (but mostly boys) were vulnerable to homosexual influences, but that (for a fee), these influences could be cured and their children could be made straight.

    Dr. Hamilton also has a history, as President of NARTH, about twisting the work of more respectable researchers to support her position. An example is NARTH’s abuse of the work of one Dr. Francis Collins. When confronted on this misuse of his work, Dr. Hamilton sent a letter to Collins essentially telling him that he was wrong about his own research. The fact that a Christian scientist could disagree with her position seemed literally incomprehensible to her, something she seems to have in common with you, funinsnow. To quote from that letter:

    “No, Dr. Collins, regardless of what you think, you do agree with us.”

    An arrogant position to take, and not the kind I’d expect to produce unbiased statistics. Still, if you want to point me toward a specific study by any of those researchers you named, rather than just the researcher’s name, we can continue. In particular the study responsible for the number you gave us earlier.

  • http://Twitter.com/AronL Aron

    Justina,

    That was a well-reasoned (if completely antiquated and close-minded) comment. Up until you called Mitch a faggot. Unless you were calling him a bundle of sticks, I might suggest refraining from those kind of personal attacks here on Hatewatch.

    It leaves you open to commentary evisceration. To which I whole-heartedly look forward.

  • funinsnow

    Simplecop, you rerun what I’ve already heard & thought about but here goes my repeats with small additions to you again. 1st, I repeat that I see something wrong with gay/lesbian activities. Just because they haven’t found a cure for gay/lesbian activities doesn’t change the fact that they must keep trying to find a cure for it just as we try to find a cure for drug junkyism & alcoholism. Maybe in the future they’ll discover the pill, drug or surgery which changes sexual orientation from gay to straight & the world will be better without homosexuality.

    As to choice, gays & lesbians do choose their sexual behavior. People choose to commit crimes such as rape 6 year old girls, though they know they’ll be punished. With violence against gays/lesbians, almost all of them both assault&battery & murder cases to repeat are domestic violence. When a straight man bashes or kills a gay, they are natl. news because it’s strange & odd but what I’ve found is that most of these cases are men reacting or overreacting to criminal abuse that the gay did. I mean if a gay is going to harass a man in a public restroom or repeatedly propose after a man has said no, then it’s criminal harassment. If a gay is going to grab a man’s butt or groin against his will, then it’s assault&battery if intent isn’t sexual to something more serious such as sex abuse. In most cases, the man bashed or killed the gay after the gay harassed them or the gay committed assault&battery such as gay grabs man’s butt or groin against will after which the man reacts or overreacts by bashing or killing him. Now yes, killing a gay in those circumstances maybe excessive, but the man reacted to criminal abuse the gay did. Jury decides if man’s reaction was just or excessive & if it’s excessive, then to what degree to convict.

    But to repeat, those cases are rare. Gays & lesbians aren’t comparable to Blacks as Blacks are a group based on ethnicity while gays & lesbians are a group based on their sexual behavior. It’s best for gays/lesbians to never have a sex life & be celibate even if orientation doesn’t change as I see gay/lesbian sexual behaviors as bad in & of themselves. I know I’m repeating but you’re saying & asking me the same things which others have asked which will get you my same answers.

  • Simplecop

    “Funinsnow”

    I have read all your comments and I get what you are saying, but please don’t try to link this with me believing what you are saying.

    First off, since being homosexual is not a disease how is it supposed to be “cured?” Doctors can cure diseases/illnesses, maybe some disorders, but your logic is that this can be “cured.” That is like saying that domestic violance can be “cured,” which we all know that it can’t be “cured.” For that matter, drug addicts and alcoholics can’t be “cured.”

    Secondly, why would anybody in their right mind choose to be or do something that would get them bullied, beat up, hurt to the point of being put in the hospital, or even worse…KILLED, if they could choose to not do what they were doing that got them hurt in the first place. That’s like asking a black to stop “looking” like a black.

    I don’t understand people like you (even if I do understand what you are saying). You ask people/tell people to stop doing what you don’t like, but are unwilling to stop doing what they don’t like.

    If anybody on this post asked you to stop breathing, or if anybody on this post asked you to become celibate, or if anybody on this post asked you to stop eating, would you?

    You have just asked people to stop loving, and showing love to another human. Most of any relationship is showing love, compassion, kindness, and care for the other person. Any relationship that is based on this is a relationship that stands a very good chance of serviving the up and downs of life. Most of the relationship that you are cutting down live this kind of life…they show each other…on a daily basis….love, comapssion, kindness, and care for each other. Please, show me where there is harm in this. Would you rather they fight with each other?

    Up until 1963, in Oregon, my marriage was illegal. I am white and I am married to a person of color. If we had met and married before 1963, we both would have been thrown in jail…until we agreed to get a devorce. I would NEVER given up my partner…my soul mate…for anything or any reason. I would also NEVER ask any other person to give up their partner…that would just be stupid.

  • funinsnow

    Aron, I know about lesbian sex by my younger days of going to the Pussycat Theater & seeing porn in 1988 & 1989. Don’t understand why they showed lesbian scenes in porn films or why a man would have an interest to see 2 women do it. That’s how I know alot about lesbian porn.

    Of course I know that gay/lesbian activities isn’t the only aspect of gay/lesbian life. But again, gay/lesbian activities is a bad thing just as crack smoking is a bad thing. For recreational drug junkies, pot/crack smoking is only a small aspect of their lives & some people think pot smoking when done recreationally is victimless. Well I don’t see it that way. Gay/lesbian activities like crack smoking should be no part of any1′s lives & gay/lesbian activities must be seen as useless just as using crack is useless.

  • Justina

    two things. firstly, the gay agenda definition of homosexuality is feelings and desires, with the unexamined, taken for granted, and usually unstated (because taken for granted) that your desires need to be acted on. The straights usually define homosexuality as ACTIONS. If you can refuse to engage in wrong things you desire to do, such as murder or rape or theft or adultery or promiscuity or whatever, then though your heart may not be clean at all times, your sins are less than if you acted out, providing you are not self proud about this.

    AND if you can refuse to engage in various wrong things other than homosexual desires, you can refuse to act on that also. To be cured then, of homosexuality, would range from elimination of the feelings beyond an occasional feeling or attraction, which is stomped down as soon as it appears, as you would feelings about your neighbor’s wife or husband for instance, and even getting around to desiring a member of the opposite sex, to being committed to not act on them, and live celibate, and have the feelings and thoughts under control even if you don’t find an opposite sex person attractive enough to marry.

    second, “Mitch Beales said,

    ON FEBRUARY 1ST, 2012 AT 11:39 AM
    Jason wouldn’t know a real man if he was buggered by him.”

    Mitch, a real man wouldn’t bugger anyone in the first place.
    I assume you are either joking, or coming from the idea that as long as a man doesn’t take it up the ass or suck another man, he is straight, even if he plays the male role in homosexual acts and buggers other men and has them suck him.

    I got news for you, faggot, such men are homosexuals in denial about what they are doing.

    The big problem I have with conservative ideas about sex roles and so forth, is that they – like transsexual ideology – takes the focus off the physical reality, and onto things that are not even uniform across all times and all cultures regarding gender personality or roles. And therefore play to the closet gay agenda that does not want things out in the open that much. The sort of person who considers themselves not gay because they only experiment and do not in any way deviate from the social roles expected of their sex.

    The tranny is a sellout to sexism. Instead of personality and activity preferences proving to him or her that sexism is wrong, they argue it is right and they are born into the wrong bodies. The acceptance by feminism of gays and trannies was the biggest sellout, aside from abortion, that they did.

    I am Christian, feminist in the old school sense, before the 1960s.

  • http://Twitter.com/AronL Aron

    Funinsnow,

    I have refuted your ‘facts,’ but you have simply ignored them. If you read my posts carefully, I did not attack you yourself. I attacked your ideas for the drivel that they are.

    You keep spouting these ridiculous claims about a full third (!!!!) of gay men and women ‘choosing’ that lifestyle due to childhood sexual trauma. And you refuse to read anyone other than Cameron et al.

    You can hardly blame us for calling you on your knowing and willful ignorance. Just because you ‘dislike’ the AMA and APA does not mean they aren’t worth reading. Hell, I get the feeling I wouldn’t particularly care for you, in person, but I still take the time to read and dissect your comments, don’t I?

    Also, enough with this bizarre obsession you have with gay and lesbian sexual practices. You seem to think that’s the ONLY aspect of a homosexual life.

    And for someone who touts homosexual celibacy, you sure seem to know a lot about man-on-man and woman-on-woman erotica…

  • funinsnow

    Aron, facts are facts & even if the AMA lies that there’s no link, if a boy is homosexually raped in youth esp. repeatedly, then yes, it’s more likely he’ll do gay activities in adulthood. You turned it into personal attacks because you can’t come up with serious rebuttal. You don’t need to be an expert to understand that repeated homosexual rape in youth esp. the younger the age can have bad impacts on how some1 can think or behave, so yes, some boys who are homosexually raped repeatedly in youth do gay activities in adulthood because they think it’s normal-they learned this sexual behavior from sex abuse. Any sexual behavior whether it’s gay or straight can be learned.

    There are women who take part in sodomy or anal & there are some men who perform anal or sodomy on women. Anal or sodomy is bad & I have no problem if they make it a crime even by willing adults. But some men who do anal on women learned this by watching porn. Penis/vaginal sex between man & woman is the only true way with if oral were to happen, woman giving man oral. But I don’t think most men who take part in anal or sodomy with a woman do so because of biology-they do so because they learned this sexual behavior possibly by porn. There are also women who do scat on other men & lesbians have higher scat rates. This sexual behavior is also learned by porn. Again, sexual orientation is a minor topic to me, as it’s about sexual behavior & any sexual behavior whether it’s straight, gay & lesbian can be learned so it’s not always biological as my eg. of men who do anal on women.

  • http://Twitter.com/AronL Aron

    Funinsnow,

    Since you are just as ignorant about the medical field as you are about human sexuality, let me enlighten you. Gastroenterologists are doctors concerned with the upper gastrointestinal tract; essentially they are the digestion specialists.

    Proctologists are doctors specializing in the lower gastrointestinal tract. These are the doctors concerned with solid waste disposal and all of the affiliated organs.

    In short, I was calling your statistics and claims to be little better than the byproduct of food consumption and digestion. Make of that what you will.