01.17.08
Posted in Bisexuality, Ex-gay, Identity, Psychology & Research at 5:46 pm by AnJ
Engine search:
“Can you change your sexual identity?”
Sure.
… if you are schizophrenic…
… self-delusional …
… or you don’t know what sexual orientation is.
Sexual orientation is something inherent for many people. That’s not something you change; that’s something you come to be aware of when you experience physical attractions. So if you want to change your sexuality identity with integrity, your sexual orientation has to be re-wired. And that, i believe, is 99.99% impossible for the person who has derived her sexual identity through thorough consideration of all her physical preferences.
It has been argued that sexuality for men is stable and sexuality for women is fluid over a life time. But these studies define sexuality at specific times according to self-reports.
Here’s a problem-
Your participants may not know how sexual orientation is defined [and hence discrepant definitions].
For most people, they make the error of defining it according to the gender of the partners they have been with i.e. the person whom they have romantic attraction towards. But being with a guy doesn’t make you a straight; just as being a woman doesn’t make you gay. And having been with members of both genders doesn’t automatically qualify you for the title “bisexual”.
Another thing to note is this- emotional attraction is a far cry from physical attraction and physical attraction is really the foundation of sexual orientation. [And your sexual orientation is only part of your sexual identity. You can read about it here.]
Sometimes i wonder if gender differences in relational dynamics are the culprit.
For example: Even if there are “Towel clubs” for gay women [i have yet to hear of one successful "towel club" for gay women here], i am guessing there won’t be many. And even through there are agency-managed male escorts and prostitutes [for straight women], there are not many.
If romantic attraction for women is determined by emotional attraction for a much larger part than physical attraction (as compared to men), is there little wonder that they found most women to be “bisexual” over a lifetime?
- About: Anj wonders...
- Forum discussion: Coming Out
- technorati: fluid sexuality, sexual identity, sexual orientation, gay, lesbian, bisexual
Permalink
05.12.07
Posted in Ex-gay, Singapore Gay News at 12:37 pm by AnJ
Life Stories- Weaving the fabric of your life.
The two story-tellers are J and KW. But there are actually three story-tellers. Edmund Smith is the unspoken third.
J is a pre-school teacher, an ex-lesbian, who looked like she is in her late-teens or early twenties. And she talked about how she was abused by her mother. This abuse sparked in her a desire for a mother-figure. She was butch and called her long tresses a “miracle of God”.
I don’t know why the theory of childhood abuse as the cause of homosexuality is frequently used. It is an ancient theory from Freud on why gay men exist. Now Freud is studied in literature, not psychology- which gives you a hint about how dependable a science it is. Read the rest of this entry »
- Forum discussion: LGBT News
- technorati: Safehaven Dialogue Session, gay, lesbian, Christian
Permalink
Posted in Ex-gay, Singapore Gay News at 12:37 pm by AnJ
Being gay- a Christian inadequacy.
Dr. Tan Kim Huat spoke about God’s laws. He mentioned that the debate revolved around whether the homosexual sex is exploitative. The pro-gay argument said that it’s for exploitative relationships only. The counter-argument is: Apostle Paul meant all kinds of homosexual relationships. [I have no clue about this argument. All i know is that lesbian sex is explicitly left out of Moses law: both men and women were mentioned for bestiality but only men were mentioned for human same-sex encounters. Whether Moses perceived sex as penile-penetrative acts only is anyone’s guess.] Read the rest of this entry »
- Forum discussion: LGBT News
- technorati: Safehaven Dialogue Session, gay, lesbian, Christian
Permalink
Posted in Ex-gay, Singapore Gay News at 12:36 pm by AnJ
The “homosexual lifestyle” undefined- problematic.
I think Edmund Smith presented an interesting argument- that ex-gays can turn straight and should. [This "should" is subtle. But you wouldn't miss this line of thought: Whoever consumes enough of Jesus would naturally be convicted by God to change.] But it’s founded on one shaky thing- the homosexual lifestyle, which he refused to define despite questions from two persons. Read the rest of this entry »
- Forum discussion: LGBT News
- technorati: Safehaven Dialogue Session, gay, lesbian, Christian
Permalink
Posted in Ex-gay, Singapore Gay News at 12:26 pm by AnJ
It was held at Amara hotel, on 10 May 2007, pertaining to the Christian perspective on homosexuality. The church that hosted it is FCC (Free Community Church), the only gay-affirming church in Singapore.There are 4 Speakers: (in order as presented on the panel yesterday)
1. Rev. Dr. Tan Kim Huat
(Chen Su Lan Professor of New Testament and
Dean of Studies at Trinity Theological College)
2. Anthony Yeo
(Clinical Director of Counselling and Care Centre)
3. Edmund Smith
(Founder of ex-gay movement Real Life Ministry)
4. Rev. Dr. Yap Kim Hao, PhD
(Boston University, Mass, USA)
(First Asian Bishop of The Methodist Church in Malaysia and Singapore, Pastoral Advisor- Free Community Church)
The Moderator:
Augustine Anthuvan
(Assistant Programme Manager, MediaCorp Radio)
————————————————————- Read the rest of this entry »
- Forum discussion: LGBT News
- technorati: Safehaven Dialogue Session, gay, lesbian, Christian
Permalink
12.12.06
Posted in Ex-gay, Queer News at 6:22 pm by lublub
I guess everyone would have heard of the Ted Haggard scandal by now. If you haven’t, here is a brief summary of what happened: One of America’s most influential evangelist, Pastor Ted Haggard, who heads a ten-thousand strong church and is a fierce opponent against gay marriage, has been exposed as living a double life as a gay person. Apparently, he had employed the services of a call boy over an extended period of time. When the call boy saw Ted on TV opposing homosexuality and gay marriage, he decided to spill the beans on Ted to the media. Enraged by Ted’s hypocrisy, the call boy decided to break the code of silence and bring the truth to light.
I guess in a surreal way, this is a fantasy come true. Let me explain why….
For many of us, we have been attacked by religious people at some point of our lives with regards to sexuality. And it hurts. Badly. These emotional wounds that will heal over time (forgiven but not forgotten); leave an unmistakable scar on our psyches. And there is nothing that triggers past pains more strongly than an old scar being digged at. I should know, after all, the strongest homophobia I encountered was from fellow Christian friends when I came out. And it hurt me really badly because I was at that point of my life when I was vulnerable and needed support, not condemnation.
There were some hurtful things said. For example, I was likened to ‘an animal’. Worse, it came from a friend who identified as ‘ex-gay’. And it cut me so badly I cried buckets, at home, in school. To others. It also developed in me a deep hatred (at that point of time) for religious homophobia. I couldn’t imagine anything worse than those moments.
I’ve always believed in the ideas of fairness and equality, and would imagine days of vengeance and revenge on these religious homophobes. ‘What they did to me, one day, they will get in return’, that was what I envisioned in those dark days. I would imagine, how those who call themselves ‘ex-gay’ or ‘reformed’, those who promote the idea of sexuality change, would one day fall on their own swords. And eat their words because they will be proven wrong. Because I believed that suppressing one’s desires is unnatural and will one day lead to an internal implosion inside the person. In my head, all those ex-gays were wrong and one day they would know and I would bear witness to it. And I will be happy for I will be vindicated.
Well, those events happened 2 years ago. And 2 years hence, came the Ted Haggard saga and the seeming fruition of my fantasies. One of the biggest personifications of religious homophobia has befallen, because of himself. Just as I had envisioned and wished for. My proof has come.
But am I happy?
Do I gloat? I’ve had my wish. But it doesn’t satisfy. No. Instead, I feel empty and pity. Pity for those who build a trap for themselves. Pity for those caught up in the system, unaware of circumstances that caused them to think that way. They believe that they are doing the right thing. If you believe you are doing something right, who can blame you for doing it?
Moreover, I think my rage has mellowed a bit. Past hurt has served an important lesson to me. It taught me a lot of things. One of which is that, no matter what people say, as long as you are happy, you don’t have to do what society expects of you. After all, you are only responsible for yourself and your own happiness. Life is what you make of it. That’s why I’m not going to bother about what other people say about my sexuality. And in that same ironic sense, I will not enforce myself upon those who say they are happy ‘being changed’. Their happiness is for them to decide. Even though we may disagree on who’s right and who’s wrong, I believe no one is the wiser. Because like I said, life is what you make of it.
My ex-gay friend, I used to think of him with a bit of pity and disdain. These days, I am ambivalent and more neutral. Both of us walked along the same path once. I stuck to the road, he changed ways. And so our life journeys part and differ. But I’m not going to say I’m right. Or the better one. Because to do that, is to act like the very people who hurt me once. To enforce my views on people who are happy with their own lives, that is invasive and bigoted.
So when I heard of Ted Haggard, sure, it strengthens my belief that repression of your sexuality is wrong. But I’m not going to tell that to the ex-gays. I’m not going to shove it in their faces even though I know I’m highly tempted to do so. Tit for tat… in vengeance of the past hurt they caused me. For they have chosen their own life paths, and no amount of ‘proof’ I give them will dissuade them. People choose what they want to believe. So I’ll just let bygones be bygones and continue as I am.
As for Ted Haggard himself, perhaps instead of laughter and gloating and condemnation towards the man…. Let us not act like the ones who hurt us. Instead, say a little prayer for him.
Peace.
tags:
discrimination,
forgiveness,
gay,
gay rights,
hurt,
lesbian,
oppression,
queer,
religious fundamentalists,
ted haggard,
glbt
- About: lublub is at peace. Ohm
- Forum discussion: Sayoni Forum
- technorati: glbt, queer, lesbian, gay, ted haggard, discrimination, gay rights, oppression, religious fundamentalists, hurt, forgiveness
Permalink
11.23.06
Posted in Emotional Health, Ex-gay, General, Identity at 3:37 pm by Guest Writers
Family…
A place of warmth and love,
A place of acceptance,
Bestowed upon by birth.
One day, to one’s consternation,
What i never knew…
Acceptance is only acceptance,
When their mould i fit into.
What’s wrong with this?
I don’t understand.
Why’s love not a crime,
only between woman and man?
“She’s beautiful, Mum.
Personality, character and all.
You will like her
As you get to know her more.”
“Abnormal! My child,
You have grieved me so.
Same-sex love is spurious…
Please redeem your soul!
“… For God on high is full of wrath
for people of such kind.
Leave this lifestyle, please my child.
Don’t, by lust, be blind.
“… Your Daddy has cancer…
he’s weaker by the day.
Don’t you care for your father?
Can’t you stop your play?
“… Our relatives will mock us.
My friends, what will they say?
That i’ve failed at parenting,
thus my child is gay!”
A foot into the mould i put…
An awkward shape it is.
Cramped toes, sprained back…
In pain, I clenched my fists.
Family… supposedly…
A place of warmth and love,
A place of acceptance,
Bestowed upon by birth.
Alas, acceptance is acceptance,
When their mould i cramp into.
Would they care my heart smithereens
as long the facade fools?
*Author has chosen to remain anonymous.
- About: The author wants to share some of the tactics used by parents, when exerting pressure on gay children for superficial change: societal norm, religion, guilt, "face" etc. You are not alone.
- Forum discussion: Sayoni Forum
- technorati: Lesbian, coming out, acceptance, family
Permalink
02.27.06
Posted in Emotional Health, Ex-gay, General at 10:22 am by AnJ
Are you seeking to “repair” yourself?
Check out the profile of potential reparative therapy seekers… They look like a bunch of self-hating, guilt-striken and confused lot- is that you?
PROFILE:
A. Intrinsic religious orientation
Your religion is the centre of your life and your religion condemns homosexuality.
Major reasons surrounding religion for seeking reparative therapy includes:
1. Religious guilt *thanks to preachers who are prigs*
2. Rejection by the church community *You don’t need people who don’t love you as you are.*
3. Fear of eternal condemnation *roll eyes*
B. Lack of quest orientation
“Quest” is the search for ‘truth’. People with this quality keep seeking answers to contradictions raised by what they see. They are open to uncertainty and doubt. So, if you accept the interpretations that your organization as the ultimate truth… and you do not like to bother about resolving contradictions… chances are you will seek “repair”.
C. Low levels of identity development
This consists of both self-identity formation and group-membership identity formation. Self-identity formation is “coming out to yourself” as we know it. And group membership formation is feeling a sense of belonging to the gay community- people who label themselves “lesbian” and “gay”.
This consists of both self-identity formation and group-membership identity formation. Self-identity formation is “coming out to yourself” as we know it. And group membership formation is feeling a sense of belonging to the gay community- people who label themselves “lesbian” and “gay”.Those who are in the early stages of identity developement may experience intense feelings, such as confusion, anger and guilt, which arose from a homophobic society. They are most likely to seek reparative therapy whereas gay people who are in the later stages of identity development do not seek reparative therapy.
D. Internalized homonegativity
Higher levels of internalized homonegativity is correlated with lower levels of identity development. Such gay people tend to view gay culture negatively i.e. believing homophobic media messages. In fact, internalized homonegativity is the main reason why homosexuals seek reparative/conversion therapy.
Higher levels of internalized homonegativity is correlated with lower levels of identity development. Such gay people tend to view gay culture negatively i.e. believing homophobic media messages. In fact, internalized homonegativity is the main reason why homosexuals seek reparative/conversion therapy.
And here is the most interesting bit: Those who are homophobic (straight people who discriminate against homosexuals) have the exact SAME profile on the above characteristics. They are also low on identity development. For someone who has a mature development, he/she would be respectful of orientation-differences. Coz it entails not just acceptance, but understanding.
- About: Mier enjoys busking in the sunshine of love~
- Forum discussion: Identity
- technorati: Reparative therapy, homosexuality
Permalink
02.11.06
Posted in Ex-gay, General, Psychology & Research at 1:25 pm by sayoni
What does it mean by the statement “science has no probative value”?
I refer to “scientific and medical communities are divided on whether it is a disorder” by Thio Su Mien (Feb 09).
Thio Su Mien has hit it right on the head when she said that “science has no
probative value as scientific truth”. Indeed, science cannot prove anything- everything is tentative so to speak. And in psychology, it takes numerous replications before a theory gains foothold. However, while it is not possible to prove something, it is possible to refute something.
For example: At first, people thought that heterosexuals cannot get AIDS. However, when there was one case of heterosexual getting AIDS, the hypothesis was thrown out of the window. People now know that AIDS is not a respecter of sexual orientation.
Similarly, for reparative therapy (Spitzer’s research on ex-gays), research has refuted the idea that reparative therapy has high successful rates. Spitzer’s participants are from a biased pool. The criteria of success is also too narrow, being mostly limited to behavior only. Surely, sexual orientation goes beyond the mere ability to engage in sexual intercourse? It is also refuted that reparative therapy has absolutely no deleterious effects. In fact, reparative therapy can have serious adverse effects on the mental health (and therefore physical health) of people.
I was amused that a few campaigns can cause changes in DSM. For i believe that homophobics are greater in number and richer (to fund the campaigns). How did the small number of homosexuals gain such influence? They must be really intelligent. And to be intelligent, they must be functioning well mentally, i would believe.
As for the development of psychology, i would like to add that the field is progressing. For example, psychoanalysis today is no longer regarded highly. Psychoanalysis theories are not testable; thus rendering it a non-science. It is rather arbitrary. By the way, psychoanalysis theory was used to explain homosexuality- in that, the male child experiences the father as cold and distant; thus he attaches to his mother, adopting a female identity. I think this gives an insight as to why some who went through reparative therapy hate their parents more- no thanks to the use of outdated theories to explain homosexuality.
When psychology articles are used to support a specific stance, it is appropriate to consider several other articles to look at the contradictions and consider the way in which the research was conducted. Otherwise, presentation would be skewed and unpresentative.
-A response that was submitted to TODAY-
- technorati: Thio Su Mien, reparative therapy, homosexuality
Permalink
02.09.06
Posted in Ex-gay, LGBT Rights, Psychology & Research, Singapore Gay News at 5:30 pm by AnJ
On TODAY newspaper, i read an article entitled “Scientific and medical communities are divided on whether it is a disorder. Is homosexuality truly normal?” dated 09 Feb 2006, Thursday. It is in support of Liberty League (an organization that does reparative therapy). By Thio Su Mien.
I was irate when i read it.
She said that “science has no probative value as scientific truth”. What she meant is: theories cannot be proven (but they can be refuted). It takes several replications before it is considered somewhat credible. But would the public know this? No, she gave the public the impression that science has no value. Specifically- the science of psychology.
Thus, in that statement, she slapped all the psychologists of the psychology department of NUS; as well as the mental health professionals situated in IMH. She also slapped psychologists all over the world- their expertise; their training and their credibility.
However, she does subscribe to research that agrees with her agenda… for later she used Spitzer’s research to back her up that homosexuals can be “changed”, and thus implicitly indicating that they should be. (How convenient for her to use research when she needs it. Kind of two-faced, don’t you think?)
And here’s the second reason why i was exceedingly upset with her. She used Spitzer’s research without considering the commentaries that NUMEROUS other professionals have made regarding Spitzer’s piece. There were so many commentaries showing the major limitations in Spitzer’s paper.
To name a few limitations:
1. There is no reason to believe that the participants told the truth: The participants are all acquired through ex-gay religious ministries and some were referred through their therapists. And the interview is not anonymous! It’s a structured telephone interview. How credible is that? Given the pressure to be “straight” and not to undermine their standing in church, do you think these “ex-gays” would tell the truth?
2. There were biases in Spitzer’s telephone interviews. Questions targetting same-sex behavior used words like “lust” but similar questions for opposite-sex behavior did not use words with negative connotation. I.e. “Frequency of looking with lust or daydreaming about having sex with a person of the same sex” versus “Percentage of masturbation occasions with heterosexual fantasies.” Which one sounds worse? Who wants to admit to “lust”? Why is same-sex attraction necessary lustful anyway?
There were also numerous studies done after 2003 (when Spitzer’s paper was published) about the harms of reparative therapy. In fact, the vast majority of research showed that reparative therapy does harm. But Thio Su Mien did not refer to them at all! In other words, Thio Su Mien presented an extremely biased summary of the field of research. She did not do a meta-analysis (a review of the whole field of research).
What grieves me:
That the layman who does not know any better… will take whatever she say and swallow it whole. None of us are experts in every field and those who are not, are prone to misinformation in the field. Someone who is ignorant of the field (and who has no incentive to read the information first-hand) is like a personal computer: Garbage in; garbage out.
Thoughts shape attitudes and actions of the people. And this is what we are living in- garbage.
In conclusion:
It is apparent at first glance that Thio Su Mien is not a trained psychologist (and yet she has the audacity to comment on the progress of psychology through the ages! I am appalled!). I would believe that she is a manipulative politican… presenting half of the story. Correction: in this case, she is only presenting 10% of it. Maybe less.
It is half-truths that does the most damage.
Thio Su Mien ended off saying that we should be less narcissistic and less selfish. I find the desciption apt for herself… She imposed her principles on everyone relentlessly; discrediting sources that does not concur with her principles and adopting sources that do.
What is it all for? For herself… to further her convictions… to add another supposed “halo” to her head?? Reminds me of the terrorists who believed that by killing others, they would get tens of virgins waiting in heaven for them.
- About: Mier believes in open-discussion and is exceedingly disdainful of people who intentionally conceal public knowledge for the sake of furthering their own agenda.
- Forum discussion: Local LGBT news
- technorati: Liberty League, Spitzer, ex-gay, reparative therapy, homosexuality, TODAY
Permalink
« Previous entries
