Homoseksualnost ni prirojena in je ozdravljiva
Iz Zenita sem dobil zanimiv članek, ki ga objavljam:
Change Is Possible for Gays, Says PsychologistAPA Admits Homosexuality Also Due to Environmental Factors
By Genevieve Pollock
ENCINO, California, JUNE 15 , 2009 (Zenit.org).- A psychologist who specializes in reparative therapy with homosexuals says it’s possible for those with same-sex attractions to change, despite agenda-driven ideologies that state the opposite.
Joseph Nicolosi, founder and director of the Thomas Aquinas Psychological Clinic in Encino, spoke with ZENIT about his experience as a clinical psychologist and the former president of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH).
NARTH, a “scientific, non-religious and non-political” organization, recently put out an article about the little known revision of the American Psychological Association’s (APA) statement on homosexuality, which was highlighted last month in a WorldNetDaily article titled “Gay Gene Claim Suddenly Vanishes.”
Nicolosi explained that NARTH has been actively working on a research project compiling scientific data to dispute the APA’s claim on homosexuality, targeting three unscientific assumptions that form the basis of their policy.
He stated that these erroneous assumptions are: “Psychotherapy does not change homosexuality, trying to change the homosexual person will harm him, and there is no greater pathology in homosexual persons than in heterosexual persons.”
The psychologist asserted that the “APA is not governed by scientists, but by political interests.”
“There has been no new data to justify their policies,” he added, “but they tend to give in to social and political pressure,” and thus “NARTH has been putting pressure on them to scientifically back up their stance on the biological nature of homosexuality.”
Now, Nicolosi reported, the APA has “diminished its position saying homosexuality is biologically determined.” They have dropped the specific reference to a hypothetical “gay gene,” he affirmed.
In other words, he said, they are beginning to recognize that homosexuality is also due to environmental factors, not just biological elements.
“In fact,” he stated, “I and many of my colleagues at NARTH believe it is more environmental than biological.”
Nicolosi noted that “the most important scientific information” gives “much more evidence for environmental causes of homosexuality than for biological.”
Possible
The most essential point however, the psychologist affirmed, “is that change is possible, that men and women can come out of homosexuality.”
“This idea of ‘once gay, always gay’ is a political position, not a scientific position,” he added.
The therapist affirmed that he has seen this in his own private practice, and that it is also substantiated in a body of scientific research.
Nicolosi, also the author of “Healing Homosexuality: Case Stories of Reparative Therapy” and “A Parent’s Guide to Preventing Homosexuality,” asserted that many people have already adopted the erroneous assumptions put forth by the APA.
There is a need to assist and minister to men and women “who are looking for help to come out of homosexuality,” he said, “because so many times they are just told ‘Well, you’re born this way,’ pointing to the APA and saying ‘because they said it.’”
He expressed the hope that as the APA recognizes the efficacy of therapy with homosexual persons, more psychologists will be encouraged to be involved in this type of treatment.
“Within our profession,” the psychologist explained, “we trump politics with science.” In other words, if we challenge the APA with scientific data, it “has to override any political or special interest forces.”
The therapist emphasized the need for all people to share this message with homosexual persons that “you don’t have to be gay.”
Encouragement
If you know a homosexual person, he said, “encourage that person, educate him, give that person information, take the opportunity to let him know that choice is possible.”
“They need to believe it,” he added.
Nicolosi explained: “It is a very hard therapy. First of all, it is hard in itself because you have to dig deep into emotional issues. Homosexuality is not about sexual issues, but emotional. There are the emotional underpinnings that have to be addressed.
“Then not only are you having to deal with those emotional underpinnings that are challenging on an individual level, but you have the other battle of a culture that is saying to you, ‘You’re homophobic; you’re naïve; you’re not facing reality; you’re just a guilt-ridden Christian, get with it.
“You’re fighting a culture that is not supporting you, plus you have your own individual battle. So it’s a two-front war.”
“With the AIDS epidemic, this could be about life and death here,” he asserted. “We’re not talking about something insignificant.”
The psychologist underlined the need to “inform and educate young people.”
He explained: “So when a 15-year-old boy goes to a priest and says, ‘Father I have these feelings, I have these temptations,’ that priest should say, ‘you have a choice; if you don’t want to be gay there are things that you can do.’”
“The boy should not to be told, ‘God made you this way,’” Nicolosi said.
Scientific data
He continued: “This is not about going after an oppressed minority. It’s not about pointing out pathology for the sake of pointing out pathology.
“This is telling young people, look, if you go down this road, you are likely to have a higher level of depression, anxiety, failed relationships, sexual promiscuity, drug and alcohol abuse than people who live their lives heterosexually. You will get involved in more, to be polite, esoteric exotic sexual practices. It goes on and on and on.
“And that’s just science, simply a comparison of two groups.”
The therapist added, “This notion that you are going to fall in love with a man and live happily ever after is Hollywood. The reality is that it’s a hard lifestyle.”
Nicolosi, also a national speaker on the topic, urged the development of more Catholic programs, noting that other faiths have already been putting forth a “vital ministry helping people coming out of homosexuality.”
“Our doctrine is clear,” he said, “and even if we have a weaker ministry, our doctrine on homosexuality is more brilliant than anything the Protestant denominations can come up with.”
The psychologist specifically referenced a 1986 document signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger before he became Pope, addressed to the Catholic bishops “On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.”
In the letter, the cardinal, at that time prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, outlined the moral underpinnings and practical considerations of the pastoral care of “those whose suffering can only be intensified by error and lightened by truth.”
In this light, Nicolosi underlined the importance of helping homosexual persons who want to change, because “if you are Christian, you have to believe that you are intended for the opposite sex” and that “sexual complementarity is part of the natural law.”
This is something that “should be evident to everyone,” as “our Christian anthropology,” he stated, and yet “it is amazing” how many people are confused about this.
“They actually believe, or want to believe, either for personal reasons or political reasons, that God created two kinds of people: homosexuals and heterosexuals,” Nicolosi noted.
“It is seeping into the consciousness without critical evaluation,” he cautioned, the resignation that “God just made them that way.”
Courage
The psychologist appealed to priests to not be intimidated to teach about homosexuality from the pulpit, noting that he has met many Catholics who are “discouraged that there is no resource for them.”
“We have Courage as the only orthodox Catholic ministry, and it’s underfunded, underrepresented and essentially pushed to the side,” he stated.
He reported that “Courage is only represented in 10% of the parishes in this country” and thus many “men and women who want to come out of homosexuality” are left without resources on a local level, making it “very tough for them.”
Nicolosi suggested that if a priest is working with a homosexual person and is uncertain about how to help, to refer him to a reparative therapist, “who really knows about this particular kind of treatment.”
“Not to just any generic psychotherapist,” he added, “but to a therapist who has training in sexual re-orientation change.”
Referencing Cardinal Ratzinger’s letter, he warned against a “studied ambiguity” in the face of the real need homosexual persons have for outreach from the Church.
Powered by FireStats
To pa prvič čujem.
Tudi bolezen verovanja v pravljična bitja in bogove je ozdravljiva. Ponavadi kar sama od sebe, ko otroci odrastejo.
Pri nas k sreči ni te pandemije, na Hrvaškem pa kar razsaja.
Par komentarjev na Nicosija z Amazona:
———————————————–
1.0 out of 5 stars Anathema to Academia, April 18, 2006
By Shining_One
I read this book as part of an Independent Study Project for my psych class. “Case Stories,” it promised. “Great!” I said. I thought this would make my project a piece of cake; psychological case histories all laid out for me, ready to spill their secrets for dissection and comparison.
As with most things in life, if something seems too good to be true it is.
Foremost, the title of this book is highly deceptive. These are not case stories, they are fables; supposedly first-person accounts of homosexuals who have become heterosexual through some form of psychological alchemy.
Beware; if you are planning to read this book in academic pursuit, you are wasting your time. No part of this book can be cited, sourced or substantiated. The author did not even attempt to provide adequate psychological case study notations.
I would describe this book as a product with a very specific niche market. Namely, people who self-identify as homosexual and for whatever personal reason wish to be heterosexual. The stories contained herein are not so much an exercise in psychiatry, but rather something from the “Chicken Soup for the Soul” collection. Here is a varied blend of stories from self-proclaimed homosexuals, each diverse enough to ensure that at least one of them will strike a chord with the reader. You can guess how each of them concludes.
Through further research into this book, and others like it, I have noticed a disturbing trend; despite the number of books claiming to offer case studies and testimonials of “former homosexuals”, the only such people to be verifiable are what one might call “professional ex-gays”. The vast majority of these people either work directly for the organization/ministry, or they have written books of their own, or they are the poster-boys who make their living touring with the organization/ministry. (etc.) In short, they are where the money is… until they slip-up and prove that they aren’t really straight after all, such as in the cases of former “ex-gay” super-stars Christopher Austin, Colin Cook, Michael Johnston, Terrance Lewis, and John Paulk to name a few.
Read this book if you wish, but I urge you to take it with a grain of salt. In my studies I have learned of many such books, some of which are still in publication and some of which that are not. It is not uncommon for these books to contain “testimonials” from people who later recant what they wrote (usually) while living at a `treatment facility’ for extended periods of time. For example I reference Kent Philpott’s book, The Third Sex, in which he gives the testimonies of six homosexuals who supposedly became heterosexual. Within a year after the book was published, all six of the people written about sent notarized affidavits to the publisher, stating that the book was untrue and that they were all still homosexuals. Nevertheless, the book continued to be printed and sold to an unwary public for eight (8!) years afterwards. To this day, people are finding false solace in `changes’ that never took place.
I also found the writing style of this particular book, Healing Homosexuality, to be dry and forced. The attempt to present emotional persuasions of the author’s agenda in the guise of scientific information is transparent and insulting to the reader’s intelligence. I feel that only those who are desperate to believe (or convince themselves of) the information herein will enjoy it.
In conclusion, the Kinsey Institute has had an open offer for nearly 40 years to report on a single case of a true change in sexual orientation, not just behaviour. In 40 years there has not been a single scientifically documented case of changed sexual orientation.
————————————————–
1.0 out of 5 stars Reparative Therapy is harmful. I should know., June 22, 2005
By Shane Greenburg (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) – See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
This review is from: Healing Homosexuality: Case Stories of Reparative Therapy (Hardcover)
I was heavily involved in reparative therapy for many years. I was their perfect candidate (virgin, “straight-acting”, etc). No one wanted to change more than me, and no one worked harder than me.
Not only does this “therapy” not work, it leaves a wake of misery and self-hatred in its path.
Of course, Nicolosi would never include me or the millions like me in his case studies. Nor does he mention how many homosexuals have committed suicide in direct response to his “therapy”.
For those stuggling out there, God made you gay and that is OK. Love yourself.
Read what the professionals have to say on the subject.
AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION
· “The potential risks of ‘reparative therapy’ are great, including depression, anxiety and self-destructive behavior, since therapist alignment with societal prejudices against homosexuality may reinforce self-hatred already experienced by the patient. Many patients who have undergone “reparative therapy” relate that they were inaccurately told that homosexuals are lonely, unhappy individuals who never achieve acceptance or satisfaction. The possibility that the person might achieve happiness and satisfying interpersonal relationships as a gay man or lesbian is not presented, nor are alternative approaches to dealing with the effects of societal stigmatization discussed … the APA opposes any psychiatric treatment, such as ‘reparative’ or ‘conversion’ therapy which is based on the assumption that homosexuality per se is a mental disorder or based on a prior assumption that the patient should change his/her sexual orientation.
· “There is no published scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of ‘reparative therapy’ as a treatment to change one’s sexual orientation. It is not described in the scientific literature, nor is it mentioned in the APA’s latest comprehensive Task Force Report, Treatments of Psychiatric Disorders (1989).
· “Clinical experience suggests that any person who seeks conversion therapy may be doing so because of social bias that has resulted in internalized homophobia, and that gay men and lesbians who have accepted their sexual orientation positively are better adjusted than those who have not done so.”
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION
· “Even though homosexual orientation is not a mental illness and there is no scientific reason to attempt conversion of lesbians or gays to heterosexual orientation, some individuals may seek to change their sexual orientation or that of another individual (for example, parents seeking therapy for their child). Some therapists who undertake this kind of therapy report that they have changed their clients’ sexual orientation (from homosexual to heterosexual) in treatment. Close scrutiny of their reports indicates several factors that cast doubt: Many of the claims come from organizations with an ideological perspective on sexual orientation, rather than from mental health researchers; the treatments and their outcomes are poorly documented; and the length of time that clients are followed up on after treatment is too short.
· “In 1990, the American Psychological Association stated that scientific evidence does not show that conversion therapy works and that it can do more harm than good. Changing one’s sexual orientation is not simply a matter of changing one’s sexual behavior. It would require altering one’s emotional, romantic and sexual feelings and restructuring one’s self-concept and social identity.
AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
· “Most of the emotional disturbance experienced by gay men and lesbians around their sexual identity is not based on physiological causes but rather is due more to a sense of alienation in an unaccepting environment. For this reason, aversion therapy (a behavioral or medical intervention which pairs unwanted behavior, in this case, homosexual behavior, with unpleasant sensations or aversive consequences) is no longer recommended for gay men and lesbians. Through psychotherapy, gay men and lesbians can become comfortable with their sexual orientation and understand the societal response to it.”
AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS
· “The psychosocial problems of gay and lesbian adolescents are primarily the result of societal stigma, hostility, hatred and isolation. The gravity of these stresses is underscored by current data that document that gay youths account for up to 30 percent of all completed adolescent suicides. Approximately 30 percent of a surveyed group of gay and bisexual males have attempted suicide at least once. Adolescents struggling with issues of sexual preference should be reassured that they will gradually form their own identity and that there is no need for premature labeling of one’s sexual orientation.”
Joseph Nicolosi, shame on you!
————————————————-
1.0 out of 5 stars Utterly out of touch, April 8, 1999
By A Customer
Ultimately this book shows nothing more than the fact that some men feel bad about themselves because they have same-sex attractions. This is hardly a stunning revelation.
Nicolosi bases his work on the assumptions that men who have homosexual feelings lack identity as a man and that their feelings were ’caused’ by a distant and unsupportive father. Anyone who knows gay men as a group will recognize how false these assumptions are; the vast majority of gay men clearly identify with (and are happy with) a secure male identity and the majority of gay men did not suffer a lack of good fathering. His views are at odds with contemporary knowledge and represent a return to the discredited and uninformed views from 40 years ago.
Nicolosi resorts to stereotyping at nearly every turn – matching his obvious dislike of homosexuality with an equally ludicrous view that heterosexuality is always a happy state of affairs. It leads one to wonder just how many gay men Nicolosi has spoken to or mixed with outside the narrow World of his clinic – and just how much he in fact knows about heterosexuals as a group.
Throughout the book one is struck by Nicolosi’s continued confusion between exclusive homosexuality and degrees of bisexuality. He must know better, yet an uninformed reader would be left with the impression that convincing a bisexual only to behave heterosexually is that same as changing the entire sexual orientation of someone who is completely homosexual. Such obfuscation does no service to anyone.
Left unsaid is the way in which Nicolosi’s views are coloured by his extremely conservative religious views. Quick to analyze and stereotype others, this therapist seems not to be interested in doing some analysis of himself or his fellow travellers in that style of faith.
Nicolosi does deserve credit for writing a book that will help inform conservatives and liberals alike that there is indeed a small number of men who will never be happy about the fact they have homosexual attractions and who will never feel able to join the ‘gay community’ (whatever that is). Such unhappy men do deserve support – but one need not subscribe to polarized and negative views about homosexuality in order to do this. Returning to old and discarded ‘theories’ that blamed the parents also provides no understanding and ultimately gives little support.
Despite the title this is not a book about therapy or about homosexuality. It tells more about politics and a particular strain of religiously inspired thought than it does about either. It tells more about Nicolosi himself than it does about gay men.
————————————————–
Naj še dodam, da se je v zadnjih letih v ZDA, po povečani tolernci do homoseksualnosti na univerzah in kolidžih pojavila kar močna ex-gay kampanja, podobna kampanji kreacionistov. Oboji namreč zahtevajo kot temu pri nas rečemo “uravnoteženost”. Kao če se uči Darwin, potem zakaj ne tudi kreacionizem in če se tolerira geje, zakaj jih ne bi tudi zdravili. Več na: http://articles.latimes.com/2006/may/28/nation/na-exgay28 Skratka. Plačan desničarski nateg, pri čemer nimajo geji nič zdraven, ampak se nanj obešajo ljudje, ki pravzaprav niti ne živijo z geji, niti jih ne poznajo, ampak bi radi “normalizirali” vse kar se jim bo “normalizirati” pustilo.
Toliko o tem kekcu.
Lp
Vili