The American Psychological Association this week released its long-awaited report on how APA members should respond to clients who experience “sexual orientation distress” and seek to change unwanted same-sex attractions ("Resolution on Appropriate Affirmative Responses to Sexual Orientation Distress and Change Efforts")
What the Report Means to Us
What does it mean for the man or woman who is distressed about unwanted homosexual attractions and wants to change them?
1. Therapists won’t be banned from practicing sexual-orientation change therapies. So you’ll still be able to find a licensed counselor, although professionals specializing in this area will continue to be relatively rare.
2. If you want a big, politically correct mental-health association to endorse psychological research that shows change is possible, you’re out of luck. But they’re not saying that change is impossible, either – only that, in the opinion of the gay-affirming, liberal-leaning task force members, existing research is “insufficient” to justify counseling for unwanted same-sex attraction, and that you are “unlikely” to be successful at change.
(I actually consider this a step closer to the truth than what the APA’s past positions have been. “Insufficient evidence” is a point of debate; “no evidence” is a complete lie. Likewise, “unlikely to change” is cynicism; “impossible to change” is outright denial of countless testimonials and other evidence.)
3. You might find it easier to find a therapist who is willing to help you balance your sexual feelings with your religious faith, even if he doesn’t believe sexual-orientation change is possible.
Other than that, what the APA thinks doesn’t really matter to the man or woman who is committed to lessening his or her homosexual attractions. The APA issue is about what can be proven by scientific research; what ethical guidelines therapists should follow; how much control the APA can have over its members; and how much political clout gay advocates have in the mental health trade groups.
Our issue, on the other hand, is much more personal. It’s about what we want for our own lives. It’s about what works for us. What makes us happy. What feels right. What feels wrong. Who we feel like we really are.
What the APA has to say to us about any of that is completely irrelevant.
What the APA Report Doesn’t Say
Nevertheless, for those who are reading what’s being said on the Web, and want a better understanding of the APA’s report, here is my summary:
What is most significant about the report is what it did not say.
1) It did NOT recommend banning APA members from practicing sexual orientation change therapies. It did not call for defining sexual orientation change therapies as unethical.
That in itself is a significant victory, given the gay-affirmative leanings of all six members of the APA task force who wrote the report.
(No therapists were allowed on the task force who actually have experience counseling clients who want to change their same-sex attractions, despite the fact that at least four highly qualified PhDs who are recognized leaders in this area were recommended to the APA selection committee. See http://www.narth.com/docs/lacks.html )
2) It did NOT repeat the lie that there is “no scientific evidence” that change is possible, as other mental health associations have done.
Rather, it said, in the view of the task force, that there is “insufficient evidence” that sexual orientation change efforts are effective; that it is “unlikely” that clients will be able to reduce same-sex attractions or increase opposite-sex attractions; and that “compelling evidence” of change was “rare.”
Being unconvinced by the available evidence (especially when you are already a skeptic) is a long way from saying there is no evidence – or, as some will distort this report, from falsely claiming that “research proves you can’t change.”
Just the fact that the APA acknowledged that it found 83 studies for review is a step forward. For years, the APA has seemed to deny even that such research even exists.
The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality put the lie to that idea last month when it published a peer-reviewed monograph called, “What Research Shows: NARTH's Response to the APA Claims on Homosexuality.” The monograph was based on a review of 600 reports of clinicians, researchers, and former clients—primarily from professional and peer-reviewed scientific journals – over the past 125 years. The monograph’s conclusion: the research shows that it is indeed possible for some men and women to diminish their unwanted homosexual attractions and develop heterosexual attractions.
Of course, the APA task force disagrees, arguing that “We found serious methodological problems in this area of research, such that only a few studies met the minimal standards for evaluating whether psychological treatments… are effective.”
Fine. Scientists always disagree on the scientific validity of various research studies—particularly when they don’t like what the findings suggest. But at least now we’re arguing about the research, instead of claiming it doesn’t exist.
3) It did NOT instruct APA members to tell clients who want to change that there is “no evidence” that therapy can change sexual orientation, as the Wall Street Journal and other media have mistakenly reported on the APA resolution.
Rather, the task force said, “We consider it inappropriate… to foster or support in clients the expectation that they will change their sexual orientation.” It proposed a resolution (which the APA has since passed) that mental health professionals should “avoid misrepresenting” the expected efficacy of change efforts “by promoting or promising” change.
The APA’s press release went further than the actual task force report, adding: “Mental health professionals should avoid telling clients that they can change their sexual orientation through therapy or other treatments.” The report itself, however, simply cautions against misrepresentation and over promising -- which is just good professional practice for anyone.
4) It did NOT “denounce reparative therapy” as some media have falsely reported.
Perhaps the report’s strongest statement against what the APA calls “sexual orientation change efforts” is simply that the APA “concludes that there is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation.” Hardly a denunciation.
APA Finally Recognizes Validity of Religious Values
What the report did say is also significant.
It (finally!) recognized the significant and valid role of religious faith to some clients in responding to sexual orientation concerns.
In the past, the APA seems to have relegated religious faith to a “fringe” status while promoting sexual drives as the exclusive or most esential factor in determining one’s values and life choices.
Instead, the report:
-- advocated “acceptance, support and recognition of the importance of faith” to some clients.
-- acknowledged that therapists can ethically help clients explore possible life paths that balance “the reality of their sexual orientation” with “the possibilities for a religiously and spiritually meaningful and rewarding life.”
The Real Evidence: Changed Lives
Personally, I know from my own experience that change is possible and well worth it! I also know dozens of others who can tell you the same thing. Their testimonials – and the lives they live as a quiet daily witness of this truth – are much more powerful than any task force report could ever be.
Friday, August 7, 2009
Saturday, April 25, 2009
The Big Lie: "No Evidence of Change"
One of the most shockingly bald-faced lies told over and over by the professional mental health associations is that there is supposedly no reliable evidence that sexual orientation change is possible.
The American Psychiatric Association claims, “There is no published scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of ‘reparative therapy’ as a treatment to change one’s sexual orientation.”
The American Psychological Association claims, “To date, there has been no scientifically adequate research to show that therapy aimed at changing sexual orientation (sometimes called reparative or conversion therapy) is safe or effective.”
The American Counseling Association says, “We found no scientific evidence published in psychological peer-reviewed journals that conversion therapy is effective in changing an individual's sexual orientation from same-sex attractions to opposite-sex attractions” and claims, “no empirical support exists for the (reparative/conversion therapy) approach.”
The National Association of Social Workers claims, “No data demonstrate that reparative or conversion therapies are effective, and in fact they may be harmful (Davison, 1991; Haldeman, 1994).
And piling on, the U.S. Surgeon General claimed in 2001, claimed that “there is no valid scientific evidence that sexual orientation can be changed (Haldeman, 1994; APA, 2000).”
Wow. What an impressive consensus.
And complete bullshit.
How do I know?
Granted, some of these statements could be hiding behind imbedded disclaimers like “valid scientific evidence” or “scientifically adequate research” in which the only valid evidence meeting their self-imposed standards would be reports that change efforts are always ineffective.
But there is still plenty of evidence of The Big Lie.
The Politically Incorrect Truth:
23+ Published Studies
Here are 23 empirical studies and case studies published over the past 40 years.
Together, they indicate that 1,202 homosexually oriented people out of 3,036 in the 23 studies (40%!) experienced at least some heterosexual shift.
Jones & Yarhouse, Book: Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study, InterVarsity Press, 2007.
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 33 out of 73
Shidlo & Schroeder, Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 2002.
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 14 out of 202
Nicolosi, Byrd & Potts, Psychological Reports, 1997.
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 573 out of 882
Berger, American Journal of Psychotherapy, 1994.
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 1 out of 1
MacIntosh, Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 1994.
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 276 out of 1,215
Golwyn & Sevlie, Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 1993.
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 1 out of 1
Schechter, International Forum of Psychoanalysis, 1992.
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 1 out of 1
Van den Aardweg, Book: On the Origins and Treatment of Homosexuality, 1986
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 37 out of 101
Schwartz & Masters, American Journal of Psychiatry, 1984
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 35 out of 54
Pattison & Pattison, American Journal of Psychiatry, 1980
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 11 out of 11
Birk, Book: Homosexual Behavior: A Modern Reappraisal, 1980
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 18 out of 29
Masters & Johnson, Book: Homosexuality in Perspective, 1979
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 29 out of 67
Socaridies, Book: Homosexuality, 1978
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 20 out of 45
Callahan, Book: Counseling Methods, 1976
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 1 out of 1
Freeman & Meyer, Behavior Therapy, 1975
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 9 out of 11
Canton-Dutari, Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1974
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 44 out of 54
Birk, Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 1974
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 14 out of 66
Liss & Weiner, American Journal of Psychotherapy, 1973
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 1 out of 1
Barlow & Agras, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 2 out of 2
Pittman & DeYoung, International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 1971
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 3 out of 6
Truax & Tourney. Diseases of the Nervous System, 1971
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 20 out of 30
Hatterer, Book: Changing Homosexuality in the Male, 1970
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 49 out of 143
McConaghy, British Journal of Psychiatry, 1970
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 10 out of 40
----------------------------------------------------------
My references for these studies are:
1) “Homosexuality: The Use of Scientific Research in the Church’s Moral Debate,” by psychologists Dr. Stanton L. Jones and Dr. Mark A. Yarhouse. InterVarsity Press, 2000.
2) New Direction Ministries of Canada: Homosexuality and the Possibility of Change Project,
3) http://www.narth.com/docs/published.html ,
4) “Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study of Religiously Mediated Change in Sexual Orientation,” by Dr. Stanton L. Jones and Dr. Mark A. Yarhouse. InterVarsity Press, 2007 See http://www.narth.com/docs/rekersrev.html
5) “Changing Sexual Orientation: A Consumers' Report,” http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=2002-01066-003
------------------------------------------------------------
Are 23 studies and case studies published over 40 years not enough to put the lie to the politically-correct mental health trade groups?
Then consider this as well:
-- Dr. George A. Rekers, Professor of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science Emeritus at the University of South Carolina School of Medicine called the Jones and Yarhouse “Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study” “clearly the best scientific study yet conducted on change of homosexual orientation…”
He said, “My academic peer review found this investigation to be the most rigorous, well-designed empirical study to date on these questions. This study meets the high research standards set by the American Psychological Association that individuals be validly assessed, followed, and reported over time with a prospective, longitudinal outcome research design.” See http://www.narth.com/docs/rekersrev.html
-- The Shidlo and Schroeder study “accidentally” (my word) found 14 cases of successful heterosexual shift (out of 202 subjects) despite the fact that the gay psychologists set out to prove that sexual conversion therapies are harmful!
Their initial outreach to study subjects included advertisements in gay publications that said, "Help Us Document the Damage of Homophobic Therapies.” Their original working title for their study was “Homophobic Therapies: Documenting the Damage.” See http://www.drthrockmorton.com/article.asp?id=201
Furthermore:
-- Dr. Robert L. Spitzer of Columbia University interviewed 200 subjects who had been predominantly or exclusively homosexual previously and who claimed to have experienced sexual-orientation change. Based on their responses to 114 closed-ended questions, he concluded that 60% had achieved “good heterosexual functioning” (which included never or rarely having homosexual thoughts) and 19% had experienced “complete” change (with no lingering homosexual thoughts, fantasies or desires).
Published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, October 2003. See http://www.narth.com/docs/evidencefound.html
-- Dr. Warren Throckmorton summarized 11 studies and published an article titled, "Initial Empirical and Clinical Findings Concerning the Change Process for Ex-Gays.” In it, Throckmorton concludes: “My literature review contradicts the policies of major mental health organizations because it suggests that sexual orientation, once thought to be an unchanging sexual trait, is actually quite flexible for many people, changing as a result of therapy for some, ministry for others and spontaneously for still others.”
Published in the American Psychological Association’s June 2002 issue of Professional Psychology: Research and Practice.
-- The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality surveyed 206 therapists and counselors who have counseled individuals who sought to change from a homosexual orientation. Collectively, these 206 professionals had worked with a total of at least 9,702 homosexual clients seeking sexual reorientation.
More than 40% of therapists said that the majority (61% or more) of their clients had either "adopted a primarily heterosexual orientation (not just behavior)" or "experienced a significant decrease in unwanted homosexual thoughts, feelings and behaviors" or both. At an average of 47 clients per therapist, that would represent more than 2,350 clients who experienced a significant homosexual-to-heterosexual shift, according to the therapists who counseled them.
Published in the peer-reviewed professional journal Psychological Reports in April 1997. See http://www.narth.com/docs/published.html
The ONLY reasonable conclusion is that there is in fact substantial empirical evidence that some homosexually oriented individuals have experienced at least some sexual orientation change.
Whatever anyone else says, whether it is the APA or the U.S. surgeon general, the idea that there is no empirical evidence is quite obviously A Big Lie.
The American Psychiatric Association claims, “There is no published scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of ‘reparative therapy’ as a treatment to change one’s sexual orientation.”
The American Psychological Association claims, “To date, there has been no scientifically adequate research to show that therapy aimed at changing sexual orientation (sometimes called reparative or conversion therapy) is safe or effective.”
The American Counseling Association says, “We found no scientific evidence published in psychological peer-reviewed journals that conversion therapy is effective in changing an individual's sexual orientation from same-sex attractions to opposite-sex attractions” and claims, “no empirical support exists for the (reparative/conversion therapy) approach.”
The National Association of Social Workers claims, “No data demonstrate that reparative or conversion therapies are effective, and in fact they may be harmful (Davison, 1991; Haldeman, 1994).
And piling on, the U.S. Surgeon General claimed in 2001, claimed that “there is no valid scientific evidence that sexual orientation can be changed (Haldeman, 1994; APA, 2000).”
Wow. What an impressive consensus.
And complete bullshit.
How do I know?
Granted, some of these statements could be hiding behind imbedded disclaimers like “valid scientific evidence” or “scientifically adequate research” in which the only valid evidence meeting their self-imposed standards would be reports that change efforts are always ineffective.
But there is still plenty of evidence of The Big Lie.
The Politically Incorrect Truth:
23+ Published Studies
Here are 23 empirical studies and case studies published over the past 40 years.
Together, they indicate that 1,202 homosexually oriented people out of 3,036 in the 23 studies (40%!) experienced at least some heterosexual shift.
Jones & Yarhouse, Book: Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study, InterVarsity Press, 2007.
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 33 out of 73
Shidlo & Schroeder, Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 2002.
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 14 out of 202
Nicolosi, Byrd & Potts, Psychological Reports, 1997.
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 573 out of 882
Berger, American Journal of Psychotherapy, 1994.
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 1 out of 1
MacIntosh, Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 1994.
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 276 out of 1,215
Golwyn & Sevlie, Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 1993.
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 1 out of 1
Schechter, International Forum of Psychoanalysis, 1992.
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 1 out of 1
Van den Aardweg, Book: On the Origins and Treatment of Homosexuality, 1986
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 37 out of 101
Schwartz & Masters, American Journal of Psychiatry, 1984
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 35 out of 54
Pattison & Pattison, American Journal of Psychiatry, 1980
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 11 out of 11
Birk, Book: Homosexual Behavior: A Modern Reappraisal, 1980
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 18 out of 29
Masters & Johnson, Book: Homosexuality in Perspective, 1979
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 29 out of 67
Socaridies, Book: Homosexuality, 1978
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 20 out of 45
Callahan, Book: Counseling Methods, 1976
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 1 out of 1
Freeman & Meyer, Behavior Therapy, 1975
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 9 out of 11
Canton-Dutari, Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1974
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 44 out of 54
Birk, Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 1974
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 14 out of 66
Liss & Weiner, American Journal of Psychotherapy, 1973
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 1 out of 1
Barlow & Agras, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 2 out of 2
Pittman & DeYoung, International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 1971
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 3 out of 6
Truax & Tourney. Diseases of the Nervous System, 1971
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 20 out of 30
Hatterer, Book: Changing Homosexuality in the Male, 1970
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 49 out of 143
McConaghy, British Journal of Psychiatry, 1970
Experiencing at least some heterosexual shift: 10 out of 40
----------------------------------------------------------
My references for these studies are:
1) “Homosexuality: The Use of Scientific Research in the Church’s Moral Debate,” by psychologists Dr. Stanton L. Jones and Dr. Mark A. Yarhouse. InterVarsity Press, 2000.
2) New Direction Ministries of Canada: Homosexuality and the Possibility of Change Project,
3) http://www.narth.com/docs/published.html ,
4) “Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study of Religiously Mediated Change in Sexual Orientation,” by Dr. Stanton L. Jones and Dr. Mark A. Yarhouse. InterVarsity Press, 2007 See http://www.narth.com/docs/rekersrev.html
5) “Changing Sexual Orientation: A Consumers' Report,” http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=2002-01066-003
------------------------------------------------------------
Are 23 studies and case studies published over 40 years not enough to put the lie to the politically-correct mental health trade groups?
Then consider this as well:
-- Dr. George A. Rekers, Professor of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science Emeritus at the University of South Carolina School of Medicine called the Jones and Yarhouse “Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study” “clearly the best scientific study yet conducted on change of homosexual orientation…”
He said, “My academic peer review found this investigation to be the most rigorous, well-designed empirical study to date on these questions. This study meets the high research standards set by the American Psychological Association that individuals be validly assessed, followed, and reported over time with a prospective, longitudinal outcome research design.” See http://www.narth.com/docs/rekersrev.html
-- The Shidlo and Schroeder study “accidentally” (my word) found 14 cases of successful heterosexual shift (out of 202 subjects) despite the fact that the gay psychologists set out to prove that sexual conversion therapies are harmful!
Their initial outreach to study subjects included advertisements in gay publications that said, "Help Us Document the Damage of Homophobic Therapies.” Their original working title for their study was “Homophobic Therapies: Documenting the Damage.” See http://www.drthrockmorton.com/article.asp?id=201
Furthermore:
-- Dr. Robert L. Spitzer of Columbia University interviewed 200 subjects who had been predominantly or exclusively homosexual previously and who claimed to have experienced sexual-orientation change. Based on their responses to 114 closed-ended questions, he concluded that 60% had achieved “good heterosexual functioning” (which included never or rarely having homosexual thoughts) and 19% had experienced “complete” change (with no lingering homosexual thoughts, fantasies or desires).
Published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, October 2003. See http://www.narth.com/docs/evidencefound.html
-- Dr. Warren Throckmorton summarized 11 studies and published an article titled, "Initial Empirical and Clinical Findings Concerning the Change Process for Ex-Gays.” In it, Throckmorton concludes: “My literature review contradicts the policies of major mental health organizations because it suggests that sexual orientation, once thought to be an unchanging sexual trait, is actually quite flexible for many people, changing as a result of therapy for some, ministry for others and spontaneously for still others.”
Published in the American Psychological Association’s June 2002 issue of Professional Psychology: Research and Practice.
-- The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality surveyed 206 therapists and counselors who have counseled individuals who sought to change from a homosexual orientation. Collectively, these 206 professionals had worked with a total of at least 9,702 homosexual clients seeking sexual reorientation.
More than 40% of therapists said that the majority (61% or more) of their clients had either "adopted a primarily heterosexual orientation (not just behavior)" or "experienced a significant decrease in unwanted homosexual thoughts, feelings and behaviors" or both. At an average of 47 clients per therapist, that would represent more than 2,350 clients who experienced a significant homosexual-to-heterosexual shift, according to the therapists who counseled them.
Published in the peer-reviewed professional journal Psychological Reports in April 1997. See http://www.narth.com/docs/published.html
The ONLY reasonable conclusion is that there is in fact substantial empirical evidence that some homosexually oriented individuals have experienced at least some sexual orientation change.
Whatever anyone else says, whether it is the APA or the U.S. surgeon general, the idea that there is no empirical evidence is quite obviously A Big Lie.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Can't We All Just Get Along?
“Can’t we all just get along?”
That was the plaintive cry of police beating victim Rodney King during the 1992 Los Angeles riots that erupted after a jury found the police not guilty. I was working at a bank in downtown Los Angeles at the time, and was a firsthand witness to the rampant destruction that led Rodney King to go on television to plead for civility.
“Can’t we all just get along?”
Rodney King’s words come back to me as I contemplate this year’s planned “Day of Silence” on Friday, April 17, organized by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, or GLSEN. On the Day of Silence, high school and middle school students are encouraged to take a day-long vow of silence to symbolize solidarity with the supposed “silencing” of “GLBT” students and their supporters.
In response, more than 20 conservative groups are calling for a walk-out at participating middle and high schools, urging parents to keep their children home Friday, according to the Christian Post. Meanwhile, the Alliance Defense Fund has responded by organizing its own “Day of Truth,” scheduled for Monday April 20. Students are encouraged to wear T-shirts and pass out cards with messages like:
“I'm speaking the Truth to break the silence. True tolerance means that people with differing -- even opposing -- viewpoints can freely exchange ideas and respectfully listen to each other. It's time for an honest conversation about homosexuality. There's freedom to change if you want to. Let’s talk.”
I find the claim of gays being silenced to be ironic to the point of Orwellian doublespeak. From where I sit, the gay lobby appears to have an enormous platform to speak out, including the world’s news media in their hands. Never has any “oppressed minority” overcome so much to become so celebrated and endorsed by the world’s media and political and entertainment elite in so few years.
Meanwhile, those who would dare claim that maybe gays are not “born that way,” and point out that some people have changed from gay to straight, are routinely and roundly ridiculed as small-minded, hate-mongering homophobes and are regularly shamed into silence. Try speaking out with this alternative viewpoint, and see who it is that is really being silenced. Your view will typically be labeled as divisive hate speech, and hate speech cannot be tolerated.
Nevertheless, the answer, in my view, is not to lash out at the gay lobby and fan the flames of dissent. The answer is to display true tolerance, not the artificial tolerance that is really a code word for “endorse-our-viewpoint-and-our-way-of-life-or-be-attacked-as-a-homophobe.”
Too many people want to make homosexuality and the possibility of change an us-versus-them, all-or-nothing issue with clear winners and losers. Small-minded, hate-mongering homophobes (allegedly) on one side versus lust-driven, devil-loving perverts (allegedly) on the other side.
Can’t we all just get along?
As the founder of People Can Change, I quite clearly represent the viewpoint that sexual orientation change is possible…at least for some people. Is it possible for everyone? How could I possibly know that?
I only know that I have experienced profound change, and am much happier for it. I also know that many of my friends and colleagues in this movement have experienced dramatic change, and are much happier for it. And that is the message I choose to share.
I have always said as much on the People Can Change Web site. I have stated it in my audio CD, Journey Out of Homosexuality. It is part of our organization’s foundational philosophies, which state in part:
-- We recognize the inherent and equal worth of all people. We strongly object to “gay bashing” – just as we object to “ex-gay bashing” – and instead encourage compassion and understanding for all who deal with or have ever dealt with homosexuality, however they may choose to address it in their lives. We respect their dignity, worth, right to self-determination, and right to equal protection under the law.
-- Significant sexual-orientation change may or may not be possible for every person who has homosexual desires. Likewise, pursuing change is not the only possible response to unwanted homosexual feelings and may or may not be the most appropriate resolution for any particular individual.
-- No one can make anyone else change their sexual orientation against their will, nor do we believe anyone should attempt to force or pressure someone to change who is not intrinsically motivated to do so.
Despite this policy of tolerance and respect, I regularly receive hate email, lashing out at me as a homophobe and hate-monger, sometimes damning me to hell and wishing me an early and painful death.
Whatever happened to freedom of choice? To the right to self determination? And simply to free speech?
Sharing my personal story, and the path that worked for me and has worked for so many others, is not anti-gay.
It is pro-individual.
It is pro-self-determination.
It is pro-choice.
If we could all show more respect for the individual, for self-determination, for freedom of choice, then certainly we could all get along.
That was the plaintive cry of police beating victim Rodney King during the 1992 Los Angeles riots that erupted after a jury found the police not guilty. I was working at a bank in downtown Los Angeles at the time, and was a firsthand witness to the rampant destruction that led Rodney King to go on television to plead for civility.
“Can’t we all just get along?”
Rodney King’s words come back to me as I contemplate this year’s planned “Day of Silence” on Friday, April 17, organized by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, or GLSEN. On the Day of Silence, high school and middle school students are encouraged to take a day-long vow of silence to symbolize solidarity with the supposed “silencing” of “GLBT” students and their supporters.
In response, more than 20 conservative groups are calling for a walk-out at participating middle and high schools, urging parents to keep their children home Friday, according to the Christian Post. Meanwhile, the Alliance Defense Fund has responded by organizing its own “Day of Truth,” scheduled for Monday April 20. Students are encouraged to wear T-shirts and pass out cards with messages like:
“I'm speaking the Truth to break the silence. True tolerance means that people with differing -- even opposing -- viewpoints can freely exchange ideas and respectfully listen to each other. It's time for an honest conversation about homosexuality. There's freedom to change if you want to. Let’s talk.”
I find the claim of gays being silenced to be ironic to the point of Orwellian doublespeak. From where I sit, the gay lobby appears to have an enormous platform to speak out, including the world’s news media in their hands. Never has any “oppressed minority” overcome so much to become so celebrated and endorsed by the world’s media and political and entertainment elite in so few years.
Meanwhile, those who would dare claim that maybe gays are not “born that way,” and point out that some people have changed from gay to straight, are routinely and roundly ridiculed as small-minded, hate-mongering homophobes and are regularly shamed into silence. Try speaking out with this alternative viewpoint, and see who it is that is really being silenced. Your view will typically be labeled as divisive hate speech, and hate speech cannot be tolerated.
Nevertheless, the answer, in my view, is not to lash out at the gay lobby and fan the flames of dissent. The answer is to display true tolerance, not the artificial tolerance that is really a code word for “endorse-our-viewpoint-and-our-way-of-life-or-be-attacked-as-a-homophobe.”
Too many people want to make homosexuality and the possibility of change an us-versus-them, all-or-nothing issue with clear winners and losers. Small-minded, hate-mongering homophobes (allegedly) on one side versus lust-driven, devil-loving perverts (allegedly) on the other side.
Can’t we all just get along?
As the founder of People Can Change, I quite clearly represent the viewpoint that sexual orientation change is possible…at least for some people. Is it possible for everyone? How could I possibly know that?
I only know that I have experienced profound change, and am much happier for it. I also know that many of my friends and colleagues in this movement have experienced dramatic change, and are much happier for it. And that is the message I choose to share.
I have always said as much on the People Can Change Web site. I have stated it in my audio CD, Journey Out of Homosexuality. It is part of our organization’s foundational philosophies, which state in part:
-- We recognize the inherent and equal worth of all people. We strongly object to “gay bashing” – just as we object to “ex-gay bashing” – and instead encourage compassion and understanding for all who deal with or have ever dealt with homosexuality, however they may choose to address it in their lives. We respect their dignity, worth, right to self-determination, and right to equal protection under the law.
-- Significant sexual-orientation change may or may not be possible for every person who has homosexual desires. Likewise, pursuing change is not the only possible response to unwanted homosexual feelings and may or may not be the most appropriate resolution for any particular individual.
-- No one can make anyone else change their sexual orientation against their will, nor do we believe anyone should attempt to force or pressure someone to change who is not intrinsically motivated to do so.
Despite this policy of tolerance and respect, I regularly receive hate email, lashing out at me as a homophobe and hate-monger, sometimes damning me to hell and wishing me an early and painful death.
Whatever happened to freedom of choice? To the right to self determination? And simply to free speech?
Sharing my personal story, and the path that worked for me and has worked for so many others, is not anti-gay.
It is pro-individual.
It is pro-self-determination.
It is pro-choice.
If we could all show more respect for the individual, for self-determination, for freedom of choice, then certainly we could all get along.
Monday, April 13, 2009
An Accidental Founder, Step by Step
I call myself the “accidental founder” of People Can Change.
My intention back in 2000 was simply to start a Web site containing the true stories of men who, like me, had broken free of unwanted same-sex attractions. Little did I know that God (... along with the hunger that so many men who are conflicted over their SSA had for information and support ... along with my own passion to help others ...) would lead me to co-create an international non-profit organization presenting profoundly healing personal-growth seminars and other resources to thousands of men and their families.
Step by step I felt led to do more. And one by one, others joined me in this newfound mission, bringing their own passion to serve, making it their own mission and cause as well, co-creating something far beyond any one man’s capacity or even one man’s vision.
My motivation in creating the original Web site (http://www.peoplecanchange.com/) was to find the commonalities in the paths of men who had experienced profound change, and to share those commonalities with others who were likewise seeking a way free. I wanted to give others a practical path to follow, forged by others who had walked the difficult journey out of homosexuality before them. There was no reason that others had to flounder in the dark, alone, as I had for so many years, unaware that there was a path out, if only someone would light the way.
I was motivated to start http://www.peoplecanchange.com/ in part by the fact that all I could find on the Web about dealing with unwanted same-sex attractions at that time were:
-- pro-gay claims that change was impossible and homosexuality must be accepted and enjoyed;
-- scripture-based injunctions against homosexuality, with no real help or hope suggesting what could actually be done about it if one experienced unwanted same-sex attractions;
-- stories of conversion from homosexuality through a religious conversion to Christ;
-- professional perspectives from some out-of-the-mainstream therapists who asserted that their clinical experiences showed that sexual-orientation change was indeed possible.
Missing, by and large, were personal accounts of change from an emotional, psychological or personal-growth perspective as told by individuals who had experienced it themselves. I could find little online that gave first-hand accounts of the successful client in therapy or other self-help programs. Almost all the “testimonials” I found online were testimonials of religious conversion as the pathway out of homosexuality.
In no way do I want to diminish the reality and value of those spiritual testimonials. I welcome them as an important contributor to the body of literature on what can work for some people. It’s just that spiritual conversion, in my experience, is not the principal answer for everyone.
My own experience with change was much more about my emotional, psychological and social transformation than it was a spiritual transformation, although spirituality played a vital part in guiding and fueling my journey. I didn’t struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions for all those years because I was spiritually broken. (In fact, my spiritual life was in some ways one of the areas in which I was strongest.) I struggled because I was emotionally broken. I didn’t feel “man enough.” I didn’t feel like I belonged in the company of “real men.” I didn’t trust men. Yet I craved their attention, affirmation and affection. I craved masculinity, and mistakenly searched for it sexually from other men when I didn’t believe it was possible to experience it in any other way.
That was my story. Not a story of spiritual conversion nearly so much as a story of emotional discovery, new friendship, personal growth, emotional risk.
Realizing by then that my experience couldn’t possibly be unique, I sought out a dozen other men to interview about their own emotional discoveries and experiences on their respective journeys out of homosexuality. (Their stories appear at http://peoplecanchange.com/About_Us.htm.) I summarized common elements I found in our collective experiences, and wrote and published the first version of http://www.peoplecanchange.com/, using do-it-yourself Web publication software “for dummies” (because I really had no idea what I was doing, technologically).
When http://www.peoplecanchange.com/ went online in September 2000, I thought my work was done. I would maintain the Web site as a resource to others, and remain in comfortable anonymity as “Ben Newman.” Mission accomplished.
God, apparently, had other plans.
What I didn’t realize was that I had started rolling a snowball downhill, and it would only grow and increase in speed as it moved forward. The hunger of so many others for answers and support, and my passion to help and to serve, caused People Can Change to become so much more than just another Web site.
Soon, a Web site reader contacted me and encouraged me to start an online Listserv or Yahoo group so those who found http://www.peoplecanchange.com/ could support and learn from each other. I started the first online group in February 2001, and today People Can Change hosts eight such groups (including a group for wives), with combined membership totaling more than 1,200.
But I felt a passion to do still more. In fall 2001, I suggested to the men in our steadily growing online community that we meet together for an in-person weekend retreat of personal-growth work. I created the initial agenda for the retreat, based on some of my experiences in therapy for unwanted SSA, in a 12-Step Sexaholics Anonymous group, and especially in the New Warrior program that I had been involved in since August 1998 (and through which I had experienced tremendous healing of my masculine wounds).
To help me staff it, I invited four other men: David Matheson, a (then) California-based therapist specializing in “gender affirming therapy”; Arthur Goldberg, the founder of a Jewish “ministry” called JONAH (Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality) based in New Jersey; and two men from my local New Warriors group in Virginia who were gifted facilitators of psychodramatic-style healing work.
We held the first Journey Into Manhood weekend at a retreat center in Maryland in January 2002. Twenty-three participants came from 12 states, as far away as California, to experience authentic connection and healing. Far more than just a seminar or workshop, we created Journey Into Manhood as an experiential–healing weekend where men could examine themselves deeply and could touch and begin to heal some of their deep emotional wounds. It was powerful and profound. Men’s lives were changed.
Therapist David Matheson immediately saw the vision of what Journey Into Manhood could become, and passionately began working with me to further develop the psychological theory and processes of the weekend so that it would have an even greater impact on future participants and to enable us to replicate it over and over. Without David’s expertise and passion, and his joining me as co-creator and co-developer of Journey Into Manhood, I probably would have burned out quickly, and “JiM” would likely not have as powerful an impact nor be as safe a place for men to do deep emotional healing work.
We presented Journey Into Manhood three times in 2002, in Maryland and California, then four times in 2003, and so forth. Our maximum capacity grew from 24 “journeyers” to 32. Our volunteer staff grew from five to nine to 20.
In the fall of 2008, at our 36th presentation of the Journey Into Manhood weekend, held near London, England, we passed the “1,000th journeyer” milestone. Next month, we will present JiM for the 40th time, near Chicago. By now, some 1,000 men from 30 countries and 43 U.S. states have been through the weekend.
In follow-up surveys, 4 out of 5 participants said their SSA has diminished in the months or years since they experienced the Journey Into Manhood weekend.
People Can Change continues to expand. We have added follow-up weekends, and in August we will present “Journey Beyond” for the fourth time. In June we will offer our first-ever weekend program for wives of past JiM participants.
Years ago, in 2003, we became a 501(c)(3) non-profit educational organization. Our mission is to offer men who seek transformation out of homosexuality a pathway of healing, by providing information, training, and support.
Then, in 2005, I left corporate America and began to work part time as executive director of People Can Change and part time as a life coach, working with individual men (and groups of men) by phone to help them develop a more powerful sense of masculinity, and to align their sexual feelings and behaviors with their personal values and goals.
When all of this began as the germ of an idea back in 2000, I did not have the vision of creating an international non-profit organization presenting profoundly healing personal-growth seminars and other resources to thousands of men and their families. I did not then have it as part of my life mission to be a “courageous champion of men’s healing and brotherly love.”
All of this has come about step by step, led by the unseen hand of God. Today, the vision of us who lead and guide and serve this organization is much greater. But I wonder if even yet we have a clear idea of all that God is building, with us as tools in his hands.
My intention back in 2000 was simply to start a Web site containing the true stories of men who, like me, had broken free of unwanted same-sex attractions. Little did I know that God (... along with the hunger that so many men who are conflicted over their SSA had for information and support ... along with my own passion to help others ...) would lead me to co-create an international non-profit organization presenting profoundly healing personal-growth seminars and other resources to thousands of men and their families.
Step by step I felt led to do more. And one by one, others joined me in this newfound mission, bringing their own passion to serve, making it their own mission and cause as well, co-creating something far beyond any one man’s capacity or even one man’s vision.
My motivation in creating the original Web site (http://www.peoplecanchange.com/) was to find the commonalities in the paths of men who had experienced profound change, and to share those commonalities with others who were likewise seeking a way free. I wanted to give others a practical path to follow, forged by others who had walked the difficult journey out of homosexuality before them. There was no reason that others had to flounder in the dark, alone, as I had for so many years, unaware that there was a path out, if only someone would light the way.
I was motivated to start http://www.peoplecanchange.com/ in part by the fact that all I could find on the Web about dealing with unwanted same-sex attractions at that time were:
-- pro-gay claims that change was impossible and homosexuality must be accepted and enjoyed;
-- scripture-based injunctions against homosexuality, with no real help or hope suggesting what could actually be done about it if one experienced unwanted same-sex attractions;
-- stories of conversion from homosexuality through a religious conversion to Christ;
-- professional perspectives from some out-of-the-mainstream therapists who asserted that their clinical experiences showed that sexual-orientation change was indeed possible.
Missing, by and large, were personal accounts of change from an emotional, psychological or personal-growth perspective as told by individuals who had experienced it themselves. I could find little online that gave first-hand accounts of the successful client in therapy or other self-help programs. Almost all the “testimonials” I found online were testimonials of religious conversion as the pathway out of homosexuality.
In no way do I want to diminish the reality and value of those spiritual testimonials. I welcome them as an important contributor to the body of literature on what can work for some people. It’s just that spiritual conversion, in my experience, is not the principal answer for everyone.
My own experience with change was much more about my emotional, psychological and social transformation than it was a spiritual transformation, although spirituality played a vital part in guiding and fueling my journey. I didn’t struggle with unwanted same-sex attractions for all those years because I was spiritually broken. (In fact, my spiritual life was in some ways one of the areas in which I was strongest.) I struggled because I was emotionally broken. I didn’t feel “man enough.” I didn’t feel like I belonged in the company of “real men.” I didn’t trust men. Yet I craved their attention, affirmation and affection. I craved masculinity, and mistakenly searched for it sexually from other men when I didn’t believe it was possible to experience it in any other way.
That was my story. Not a story of spiritual conversion nearly so much as a story of emotional discovery, new friendship, personal growth, emotional risk.
Realizing by then that my experience couldn’t possibly be unique, I sought out a dozen other men to interview about their own emotional discoveries and experiences on their respective journeys out of homosexuality. (Their stories appear at http://peoplecanchange.com/About_Us.htm.) I summarized common elements I found in our collective experiences, and wrote and published the first version of http://www.peoplecanchange.com/, using do-it-yourself Web publication software “for dummies” (because I really had no idea what I was doing, technologically).
When http://www.peoplecanchange.com/ went online in September 2000, I thought my work was done. I would maintain the Web site as a resource to others, and remain in comfortable anonymity as “Ben Newman.” Mission accomplished.
God, apparently, had other plans.
What I didn’t realize was that I had started rolling a snowball downhill, and it would only grow and increase in speed as it moved forward. The hunger of so many others for answers and support, and my passion to help and to serve, caused People Can Change to become so much more than just another Web site.
Soon, a Web site reader contacted me and encouraged me to start an online Listserv or Yahoo group so those who found http://www.peoplecanchange.com/ could support and learn from each other. I started the first online group in February 2001, and today People Can Change hosts eight such groups (including a group for wives), with combined membership totaling more than 1,200.
But I felt a passion to do still more. In fall 2001, I suggested to the men in our steadily growing online community that we meet together for an in-person weekend retreat of personal-growth work. I created the initial agenda for the retreat, based on some of my experiences in therapy for unwanted SSA, in a 12-Step Sexaholics Anonymous group, and especially in the New Warrior program that I had been involved in since August 1998 (and through which I had experienced tremendous healing of my masculine wounds).
To help me staff it, I invited four other men: David Matheson, a (then) California-based therapist specializing in “gender affirming therapy”; Arthur Goldberg, the founder of a Jewish “ministry” called JONAH (Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality) based in New Jersey; and two men from my local New Warriors group in Virginia who were gifted facilitators of psychodramatic-style healing work.
We held the first Journey Into Manhood weekend at a retreat center in Maryland in January 2002. Twenty-three participants came from 12 states, as far away as California, to experience authentic connection and healing. Far more than just a seminar or workshop, we created Journey Into Manhood as an experiential–healing weekend where men could examine themselves deeply and could touch and begin to heal some of their deep emotional wounds. It was powerful and profound. Men’s lives were changed.
Therapist David Matheson immediately saw the vision of what Journey Into Manhood could become, and passionately began working with me to further develop the psychological theory and processes of the weekend so that it would have an even greater impact on future participants and to enable us to replicate it over and over. Without David’s expertise and passion, and his joining me as co-creator and co-developer of Journey Into Manhood, I probably would have burned out quickly, and “JiM” would likely not have as powerful an impact nor be as safe a place for men to do deep emotional healing work.
We presented Journey Into Manhood three times in 2002, in Maryland and California, then four times in 2003, and so forth. Our maximum capacity grew from 24 “journeyers” to 32. Our volunteer staff grew from five to nine to 20.
In the fall of 2008, at our 36th presentation of the Journey Into Manhood weekend, held near London, England, we passed the “1,000th journeyer” milestone. Next month, we will present JiM for the 40th time, near Chicago. By now, some 1,000 men from 30 countries and 43 U.S. states have been through the weekend.
In follow-up surveys, 4 out of 5 participants said their SSA has diminished in the months or years since they experienced the Journey Into Manhood weekend.
People Can Change continues to expand. We have added follow-up weekends, and in August we will present “Journey Beyond” for the fourth time. In June we will offer our first-ever weekend program for wives of past JiM participants.
Years ago, in 2003, we became a 501(c)(3) non-profit educational organization. Our mission is to offer men who seek transformation out of homosexuality a pathway of healing, by providing information, training, and support.
Then, in 2005, I left corporate America and began to work part time as executive director of People Can Change and part time as a life coach, working with individual men (and groups of men) by phone to help them develop a more powerful sense of masculinity, and to align their sexual feelings and behaviors with their personal values and goals.
When all of this began as the germ of an idea back in 2000, I did not have the vision of creating an international non-profit organization presenting profoundly healing personal-growth seminars and other resources to thousands of men and their families. I did not then have it as part of my life mission to be a “courageous champion of men’s healing and brotherly love.”
All of this has come about step by step, led by the unseen hand of God. Today, the vision of us who lead and guide and serve this organization is much greater. But I wonder if even yet we have a clear idea of all that God is building, with us as tools in his hands.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
