|
Grex > Cflirt > #17: Reparative therapy-- Change and healing is possible. | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 84 responses total. |
brighn
|
|
response 45 of 84:
|
Apr 3 15:30 UTC 2002 |
Oh, I agree. I think most people are born bisexual, though (or, at least, with
the capacity for bisexuality).
Anything which increases the amount of positive interactions you can have with
others isn't a bad thing.
|
oval
|
|
response 46 of 84:
|
Apr 3 21:02 UTC 2002 |
do they reparative therapy for those who want to go from straight to gay?
|
brighn
|
|
response 47 of 84:
|
Apr 3 21:48 UTC 2002 |
I haven't heard of it. The whole point is straight="fixed", gay="broken." You
don't repair things that aren't broken.
|
jazz
|
|
response 48 of 84:
|
Apr 3 22:06 UTC 2002 |
There probably would be if straights were discriminated against
randomly, beat up, and ostracized from their families for being straight or
bringing home their opposite-sex partner.
|
brighn
|
|
response 49 of 84:
|
Apr 3 22:14 UTC 2002 |
Bisexuals are, but that's only in gay communities. ;}
|
jazz
|
|
response 50 of 84:
|
Apr 3 22:24 UTC 2002 |
They don't get the full membership package, and sometimes suffer from
sarcasm and wit that can only be imagined in straight circles, but they don't
generally get beat up by bisexuophobes, or ostracized from their families.
Is it as bad in the gay male community as it is in the gay female
community? A lot of the lesbians I know really are in it for the benefits
package, and not a kinsey 6.
|
brighn
|
|
response 51 of 84:
|
Apr 3 22:25 UTC 2002 |
Beaten up, no. Ostracized from the "family," yes.
|
morwen
|
|
response 52 of 84:
|
Apr 3 23:54 UTC 2002 |
resp:47 No, Paul. Reparative therapy isn't about "fixing" you if you
are gay. It is about investigating the "homo-emotional" and "homo-
social" issues behind the desires. Having done so, and, perhaps,
discovered problems, seeking to heal the damage caused by the
problems. Reparative therapy isn't an attempt to "cure" homo-sexual
tendencies. It is, in fact, understood as we begin down the road to
reparation, that homo-sexual tendencies aren't some kind of disease
that you can get a shot for and be all better. Rather, we realize
within ourselves that homo-sexual tendencies are the "band-aid", if you
will permit the term, that we placed on our lives following the damage
we perceived and placed there in an effort to deal with said damage.
We do not say that "all gays" should participate in reparative
therapy. What we do say is, this has helped us and, if you are in the
same boat we were and unhappy with the idea of same sex attraction
(SSA), then this may be a solution you could look into.
That said, I feel that, after so much discussion, of which I have been
a part, however unknowingly, that I ought to take some time here to
clarify some things.
When Jon and I met, we had a lot of conversations, the result of which
was a realization in myself that I was in a situation similar to that
of Jon. By this, I mean that I also had sexual attraction to both
genders. For a while, this was not a bad thing. Occasionally, when
Jon and I were together, one of us would spot a particularly nice-
looking specimen of either gender and point it out to the other one of
us. After a while, thoough, not to mention a little experimentation, I
began to feel uncomfortable with it. I still had the attractions, I
couldn't deny them or make them disappear, but I was unhappy because of
them.
At one point, I remember Jon asking me if I could ever see myself
taking a lover in addition to my relationship with him (we were engaged
to be married at the time.) By now, many of you know about my code of
honor. I replied, honestly, that I didn't think I could. I said, I
was a one partner person and that any other relationship I had would be
a distraction for me, in part because of my Attention Deficit Disorder
(ADD). I know myself well enough to know that one partner or the other
would end up neglected and that I was safer staying in a monogamous
relationship.
Jon and I had this discussion long ago and I want to share some of the
more salient points with you all. I'll admit that the idea of Jon
taking lovers in addition to his relationship with me hurt deeply.
Still, I love Jon in a way that I can't completely describe. I can't
see myself failing to forgive him if he chose to take a lover, even if
that decision meant that I was hurt. I can see that his taking lovers
might do some damage to my ability to trust him. The first few times
he "cruised" for the anonymous encounters he mentioned in resp:0, I
felt hurt. However, I cannot honestly say that I would ever want to
dissolve the relationship based on what many of my "girl-friends"
(meaning friendly female companions) would define as cheating, in part
because he has been completely honest with me about it when he knew
there was a possibility that I might just say, "okay, that's the last
time. It's over." So many ladies do that. In a very real sense, Jon
is my dearest friend and I don't think I could have made it through my
own "repairs" without his help simply because he has been so
understanding toward the issues underlying my own difficulties
involving SSA.
I won't say "Go do this!" like some kind of Used Car Salesman. What I
do say, however, is following intense therapy for a pair of incidences
of sexual abuse that happened to me when I was 10 years old, I have
noticed a profound healing taking place. I can hold up my head and say
that I am happy to be me and happy to be a woman. I can look at a
beautiful woman in a bikini and appreciate her innate beauty with only
a brief thought toward her sexual appeal to me.
With Jon, I will say that I probably didn't write this very well and,
with him, I will also say that this has the chance of being
misinterpreted in so many different ways. Still, I'm sure you can read
the emotion behind these posts and understand that these are more
personal revelations than anything else. These are something in the
nature of wonderful news shared with good friends.
I'm done. Thank you for listening.
|
oval
|
|
response 53 of 84:
|
Apr 4 00:22 UTC 2002 |
generally speaking, straights don't really seem to have a problem with bi's
- especially women. but gays are really set in their 'identity' and are much
more exclusive of bi people. gay women generally have sex with someone, and
then want to move in with them the next day. bisexuality confuses people. and
usually people who are bi also have the opinion that identity should be a much
more individual concept, having less to do with who you fuck. hence - not much
of a 'bi movement' or strong bi identity group. i generally don't discss my
sexuality with people unless i'm a) interested in them , or b) a close friend
and it comes up or they ask. i can't think of where else it'd be relevant
(except mayb a discussion of the topic on grex ;) people think that bi's are
so lucky because they can enjoy the best of both worlds, but it's not
neccessarily the case. i generally prefer a partner who is also bi whether
male or female, i don't look for it, i've just found those are the ones that
seemed to work the best. they usually have less sexual hang-ups too. that
really cuts down on how many people that would interest you ..
i'm not sure i made a point. <shrug>
|
jazz
|
|
response 54 of 84:
|
Apr 4 00:26 UTC 2002 |
Re #50:
Well, being ostracized from "the family" is different than being
ostracized from one's family. Completely. You may have father or mother
figures in the family - I do, I've been a friend of the family for many many
years - but they're not the same as your parents.
Re #51:
I've always been confused when it comes to people having problems with
their attractions. Even when I'm in a completely committed relationship, I'm
not dead, and I have attractions to other people - I'm about as close to a
Kinsey 0 as I know, so it's members of the opposite sex - but I'd always
thought that people had accepted it as a normal part of being in a
relationship, having attractions you didn't act on. Heck, that's a part of
not being in a relationship, too, now that I think about it.
|
jazz
|
|
response 55 of 84:
|
Apr 4 00:31 UTC 2002 |
Oval slipped in with #54:
What does a Lesbian bring on the second date?
A U-Haul.
I know exactly what you're talking about. A good friend of mine is
going through that - she's had one very brief homosexual experience followed
a couple of years later by an abortive attempt at another, and now, because
the second got her in touch with the local lesbian community, she swears up
and down she's a lesbian. I called her out on it recently, and she admitted
it's political, and just where her head is at right now. But I've seen it
happen so many times, with that one lesbian klatch and with others, that I'm
strongly inclined to believe it has to do with that group, and the way it
encourages its' bisexual members to declare themselves lesbians, not shave,
and to hang out with the group. After all, if you don't, you lose those
friends. It's a real shame.
|
oval
|
|
response 56 of 84:
|
Apr 4 00:40 UTC 2002 |
yea those groups hate me.
|
jazz
|
|
response 57 of 84:
|
Apr 4 01:27 UTC 2002 |
Whyzat?
|
brighn
|
|
response 58 of 84:
|
Apr 4 03:52 UTC 2002 |
Reparative derives from "repair." Julie, your speech is so full of
justifications, it saddens me. You refer to homosexuality as a bandaid for
psychosocial problems. I didn't say that Reparation Therapy was aimed at all
gays, but I did say it was people whose thinking is, "I'm gay because I'm
broken. Fix me." That's what you said in a lot more words while disagreeing
with me.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 59 of 84:
|
Apr 4 03:56 UTC 2002 |
it should be noted reparative therapy is espoused generally by those
who are dissatisfied with their attractions.. they may have exclusive
attractions to the same sex, or they may not. We aren't going to
waste time with folks that are happy gay. We weren't happy with the
lifestyle, so..
I hate having to explain myself all over again =P
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 60 of 84:
|
Apr 4 04:04 UTC 2002 |
Okay, Paul, it's time to leave the prego woman alone.
I don't know about her, but in some aspects, I see my attractions as a
source of strength-- it is easier for me to be sensitive, gentle, open
and honest, in some aspects. I am empathetic to others who are in my
shoes. My feelings are good in some ways.
However, it has not been my experience that homosexual relations have
been good or healthy for me. It is damaging to my marriage, and it is
incompatible with my faith. Some say I should change faiths, and I
should expect Julie to learn to accept things or maybe she should
leave.
But Julie is a good woman. I love my faith. Putting my sex with men
to the side-- forever-- is a sacrifice I am willing to make.
|
oval
|
|
response 61 of 84:
|
Apr 4 08:15 UTC 2002 |
..or your faith is incompatible with you.
jazz .. the reason these groups hate me is because (in one instance in
particular) i am seen as a woman who 'fooled around' with one their 'members'
casually and with a genuine intention of getting to know her better etc
blahblah .. but because i had a boyfriend at the time, and because i am
generally close with men, and because i am not a
unfeminine-stereotypical-dyke-what-have-you they felt that i was your typical
'bi-femme-tease-bitch who didn't "fit" with their social mold and therefore
was unacceptable as a human being type situation. i dont really give a shit,
as i have no desire my individuality for that kind of crap.
i could cite other instances that have led me to feel this way.
|
oval
|
|
response 62 of 84:
|
Apr 4 08:39 UTC 2002 |
..umm .. that's .. i have no desire _to sacrifice my individuality_ for that
kind of crap.
and while im hiccupping an ranting and typing like shit...
all the shit i've experienced with women has made me really turned off by the
thought of getting involved with a woman in general. while i'm open and
willing .. i have to say that the politics surrounding it are not worth it.
i still, however, do not feel as though those 'bad feelings' are in need of
'repair' within myself, nor to conform to any steroetype of lesbianism etc.
i could really rant on the fucked-up-ness of men too .. but i won't, as they
haven't pissed up me off percentage-wise the same way as women, and my -
they're tasty.
..
|
morwen
|
|
response 63 of 84:
|
Apr 4 10:31 UTC 2002 |
resp:60 No, Jon, in this case, I think he should be free to voice his
opinion and I don't feel threatened. After all this *is* a public
forum.
resp:58
>Reparative derives from "repair." Julie, your speech is so full of
>justifications, it saddens me. You refer to homosexuality as a
>bandaid for psychosocial problems. I didn't say that Reparation
>Therapy was aimed at all gays, but I did say That's what you said in
>a lot more words while disagreeing with me.
Okay, it is true that the term "reparative" derives from the
word "repair" meaning (according to Webster's Seventh New Collegiate
Dictionary) "1a: To restore by replacing a part or putting together
what is torn or broken: FIX b:to restore to a sound or healthy state:
RENEW 2: To make good: REMEDY", which is basically what you said, I'm
just clarifying. Also, generally speaking, those of us that
seek "reparative therapy" (hereinafter referred to as RT) tend to be
those of us who believe that there is something fundamentally wrong
with us, maybe not necessarily the homosexual behavior, but usually
so.
On the other hand, I interpreted your comment "it was people whose
thinking is, 'I'm gay because I'm broken. Fix me.'" to mean that you
thought that many of us who have sought RT were just a load of
whiners. I am most likely mistaken in this assessment due to certain
inherent problems in translation between communicating persons with
differing opinions. However, if that was, in fact, the case, I want
to clarify that I in no way *expected* the world to "fix me". I
simply went in search of a personal solution. If Homosexuality were
something that required a "cure" or a specific "fix", then I wouldn't
have had to do that, would I? I will admit that I believed, and still
believe, that there was a certain part of me that was damaged by my
abuse and contributed to my eventual sexualization of the problem
because I was too young at the time to really be able to understand
how that part of me had been damaged or what sort of "repairs" were
needed.
So, in fact,I suppose I am agreeing with you. Many of us are, in
effect, saying "I'm gay because I'm broken," but I don't think any of
us are saying "Fix me." I think it is more like this "I have these
gay feelings because of something about me that is broken or not
functioning properly. Teach me how I can fix it."
It wasn't my intention to "justify" anything. I merely intended to
state the facts. I hope this clears things up a little. If you have
any other questions I can answer, I'll be happy to try to do so.
Oh by the way. I seem to recall a question regarding whether there
was ever anyone seeking RT to be free of problems that made the
heterosexual. I haven't heard of any, but that doesn't necessarily
mean that there *aren't* any. Anything's possible. After what I'vwe
been through, I can certainly testify to that.
|
morwen
|
|
response 64 of 84:
|
Apr 4 10:35 UTC 2002 |
resp:63 I have funny feeling I may seem to have contradicted myself
somewhere.
Allow me to clarify a bit more. "I have these gay feelings because of
something about me that is broken or not functioning properly.
Please, help me figure out what it is so that I can fix it."
Hopefully, that is closer.
|
brighn
|
|
response 65 of 84:
|
Apr 4 15:38 UTC 2002 |
Julie, if your complaint is that my characterization of Exodus is that the
people who go there are passively and dependently asking Exodus to "fix them,"
rather than taking responsibility for their own "fixing" by reaching out for
help, ok, I'll accept that. I'll amend to "Exodus helps people who don't want
to be gay to not be gay."
Jon, on a different thread, get off it. Suggesting that Julie should be given
special treatment because she's pregnant, or that I should "cut her some
slack" (private email) because she's pregnant, is disempowering garbage. Julie
is an adult, she made the adult choice to get pregnant (IIRC, if not, she made
the adult choice to engage in acts that might make her pregnant, and the adult
choice to stay pregnant), I'm not going to put on kid gloves and start
treating her like a child. As she said, she can defend herself. Just because
you're LDS doesn't mean you have to act like Brigham Young.
|
morwen
|
|
response 66 of 84:
|
Apr 4 21:27 UTC 2002 |
lol. Be nice, Paul. Thank you very much for the vote of confidence.
Jon, thank you for attempting to defend me. Gentlemen, I concur with
Paul in this case. Just because I'm pregnant doesn't mean I should be
treated differently. And Paul, I think you should probably give Jon a
little credit. He's going to be a daddy soon and it's his first time.
I think you could stand to be a little nicer to him. I don't think he
was acting like Brigham Young. I think he was acting like a
protective husband.
In any case. Maybe it is time to freeze this item and talk about
something else, if all we can do is argue. Lets just agree that we
disagree and move on. Okay?
|
jazz
|
|
response 67 of 84:
|
Apr 4 21:45 UTC 2002 |
One thing, to bring these two threads together, that's always bugged
me is the way that some people don't seperate a sexual preference and a
lifestyle. They really don't have anything to do with each other, other than
the fact that some groups seem to center around little in the way of common
interest except for a common sexual preference and a love for drama.
|
brighn
|
|
response 68 of 84:
|
Apr 4 22:41 UTC 2002 |
#66> Since you asked so nicely, I'll stop picking on Jon. ;} All the same,
I can't resist this, but I'll provide this preface so you KNOW I'm joking:
What, Julie? Now I'm supposed to be nice to Jon because HE's pregnant?
Boyoboy, you're just two peas in a pod, aren't you? Special treatment all
around.
|
snowth
|
|
response 69 of 84:
|
Apr 5 23:57 UTC 2002 |
(I'm glad you said it Paul, I was just about to make fun of Julie for the same
thing, but (a) you got to it first, and (b) you're already in trouble for
picking on the soon to be parents. :)
|