LGBT social engineers are preoccupied with the mechanisms by which they can change our most fundamental perceptions, namely how we understand families, relationships and procreation. One of the most ambitious of these ‘land grabs’ is their highly successful foray into schools and takeover of what we used to call sex education which now operates under the guise of relationships and sex education. It might as well be called re-gendering or gender programming.
Another area in which they have gained a foothold is the practice of psychology and counselling. Here they begin from the premise that any problems which LGBT people suffer can be explained by minority stress, homophobia or internalised stigma: the result in one way or another of their being discriminated against or victimised because of their identity. Today when an LGBT person seeks therapy, theory insists they must be ‘affirmed’ in their own particular ‘diversity’ or sub-identity, whether this be gender dysphoria, same-sex attraction or a preference for sadomasochistic practices.
This is a problem for adults seeking help, as it discounts the possibility that these tendencies may be symptomatic of other underlying issues. It takes on an even more worrying hue when it translates to young people presenting with ‘identity’ issues such as gender dysphoria. Rather than exploring the reasons for this, or possible therapeutic interventions for overcoming such confusion and unhappiness, they are ‘affirmed’ in their chosen identity before they are either physically or emotionally mature and fast-tracked on to puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, despite the implications of lifelong medicalisation when they have reassignment surgery further down the line, without the underlying causes or reasons ever being explored.
This ‘affirmation’ approach has also impinged on people with same-sex attraction seeking therapy to help overcome what they regard as an unwanted sexual orientation; they would prefer to be heterosexual. But since the statutory and professional associations in the field of psychology and psychotherapy succumbed to the demands of LGBT activists, attempts by counsellors to address homosexuality as a problem are banned. Derogatorily referred to as ‘conversion therapy’, the LGBT lobby deliberately but unfairly hark back to and equate it with an era when homosexuality was criminalised, and when there were indeed appalling ‘treatment’ abuses such as electroconvulsive therapy.
Discredited and delegitimised, in 2015 compassionately motivated talking therapies for those who wish to explore leaving their same-sex attraction were banned by the professional bodies and the NHS. The LGBT lobby have been campaigning to have this ban made into law.
Conversion therapy is a misleading term. It assumes a clumsy, binary and immutable understanding of sexuality as being either heterosexual or homosexual, and it fails to appreciate that sexuality is as nuanced, fluid and as variable as people’s lives. The irony is that while the LGBT lobby regard our biological sex as a matter of choice, they regard our sexuality – our sexual urges and ‘orientations’ – as set in stone. They are not. They can be subject to simple developmental factors such as maturity, 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 any therapy, whatever it be for. Our behaviours do not need to be ‘sick’ or ‘disordered’ for us to desire change.
The LGBT lobby also argue that people want to move away from their homosexuality only 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.
The term ‘conversion therapy’ successfully conjures up images of clients who have been pressurised by families, friends or pastors into seeking it. It is a deliberately distorted representation. The evidence is that many homosexuals do clearly express the desire to explore their heterosexual potential.The reasons they give are varied. Voices of the Silenced are the authentic words of clients in long-term therapy with Core Issues Trust in preparation for the July 2017 Church of England General Synod. The represented individuals were concerned that the Church would attempt to ban what it calls ‘conversion therapy’.
The reasons are multiple. For some it is simply and understandably 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 others, dealing with their same-sex attractions is part of preserving their marriage.
Another motivation is concern that sex has become the basis of their identity and their lifestyle, that moving away from same-sex attraction is part of a process of building identity on a firmer foundation than ‘gay’ orientation.
Some men’s same-sex attraction means that all their relationships with other men are sexualised. They feel it compromises the normal processes of male bonding and developing same-sex friendships. Men have expressed the 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 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 recovery and healing from the consequences of their abuse.
Finally some simply find homosexual relationships unfulfilling. The psychologist Joseph 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. But whatever the reason, psychologists should have the freedom to discuss them and individuals the freedom to pursue their goals.
In my next blog I will report some of the consequences of banning therapy for same-sex attraction.