LGBT social engineers are preoccupied with methods of changing how we understand families, procreation and relationships. One of their most ambitious land grabs has been their highly successful foray into schools, which I have previously discussed.
They have also over the past few years gained a foothold in psychology and this is what I would like to discuss here.
The LGBT lobby argue that any problems which LGBT people suffer from can be attributed to minority stress, homophobia or internalised stigma. Therefore, if an LGBT person seeks therapy, they must be “affirmed” in their own particular diversity, whether this is their gender dysphoria, their same-sex attraction or their preference for sadomasochistic practices.
We see this affirmation when young people present with gender dysphoria. Rather than exploring the possibility of overcoming it, they are fast-tracked onto puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, despite the implications of lifelong medicalisation when they have reassignment surgery further down the line.
This affirmation approach involves banning so called “conversion therapy“, a term which harkens back to an era when homosexuality was criminalised and there were appalling abuses such as electroconvulsive therapy.
It is a term is used to discredit, delegitimise and ultimately criminalise talking therapies for those who wish to explore the possibilities of leaving their same-sex attraction. The term is misleading in various ways.
It assumes a clumsy, binary and immutable understanding of sexuality as being either heterosexual or homosexual, and fails to appreciate that sexuality is as nuanced, fluid and as variable as people’s lives. While the LGBT lobby regard our biological sex as a matter of choice, they regard our sexuality as set in stone.
It is not. It can be subject to human volition and agency. By denying professional, therapeutic or pastoral help to those who are uncomfortable with their homosexuality, it is the LGBT lobby who are denying freedom of choice.
The lobby justify the ban by arguing that if someone wants to change their homosexual behaviour, this implies it must be a disorder. However, seeking help to change behaviours or emotions is part of therapy. Our behaviours do not need to be “sick” or “disordered” for us to desire change.
It is also argued by the LGBT lobby that people only want to move away from their homosexuality because they have been victims of homophobia. Yet those seeking this therapy are highly aware of systemic, internalised homophobia. A client who doesn’t buy into the LGBT narrative is not a victim of homophobia. To the contrary. He is a person who has developed his own point of view.
“Conversion therapy” conjures up images of clients who have been pressured by families, friends or pastors into seeking therapy. The reality is that therapists would not work with someone who was seeing them due to external pressures. It is a condition of therapy that goals are set by the client.
It is only the progressive left wing who insist on imposing their point of view.
For some it is because they would like their own family, creating children together with a person they love. This is a natural desire and does not require the ideology of “heteronormativity” to explain it. It is what our bodies were designed to do and it is the outcome of heterosexual, not homosexual love.
For some men and women, dealing with their same-sex attractions is part of preserving their marriage. Experiencing same-sex ideation is not doing their marriage any good.
Some feel that what they do in bed has come to be the basis of their identity and their lifestyle. Moving away from same-sex attraction is part of building an identity on a firmer foundation than being “gay”.
For some men, being same-sex-attracted means that their relationships with other men are sexualised. This compromises the normal processes of male bonding and developing same-sex friendships. Men express a desire to feel comfortable in relationships with men who are “straight”.
Some men and women feel that their same-sex attraction is a consequence of abuse which they experienced in childhood. Statistics indicate a correlation between sexual abuse and same-sex attraction, corroborating their point of view. Dealing with their same-sex attraction might be part of a bigger picture of healing themselves from the consequences of their abuse.
Some simply find homosexual relationships unfulfilling. The psychologist Nicolosi explained that while the experience of physical or emotional pleasure and emotional relief may be intense, the feelings do not last and may leave greater discomfort after the biochemical induced high has faded.
Whatever the reason, people should have the freedom to pursue their goals.
In my next article, I will explore some of the consequences of banning therapy for same-sex attraction.