Quote:
Originally Posted by dor  In my opinion it is because the field has been politicized by for lack of a better term 'pro gay' forces -the same way the fields of anthropology and history took far left terms post WWII. Anthropology's turn was based on out right falsification and lies - which are still widely believed. |
I have doubts about this. As far as I know the reason that the idea that homosexuality is a disease was abandoned is that noone knows how to realiably "cure" it and that, apart from the disinclination to mate with partners of the opposite sex, no detirmental effects come with the mere fact that one is homosexual. This raises the question why one would even want to attempt to "cure" homosexuality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dor With improved techniques, and as you imply - if more professional bodies took up the practice, we might see better results. |
One of the theories that seems rather likely about the origin of homosexuality is that it is (maybe among other causes) caused by hormone levels in the blood of the mother already experienced by the foetus. This then would cause certain parts of the brain to develop in a female-like way in male embryos, thereby causing homosexuality. If this indeed turns out to be the case, then going about this in a psychotherapeutical way seems rather silly, really. No definitive conclusions have been reached on this, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dor Most substance treatment programs like AA and such have low sucess levels too. i don't think its a reason
You say the side effects can be bad - maybe so, but the successes often say they find new levels of happiness - even one of the psychologists who treated them said he was able to get gays out of a destructive anonymous sex pattern - there are plenty of testimonials here: Interviews/Testimonials |
I think the "destructive anonymous sex pattern" is another issue. It is also quite imaginable to get out of such a pattern without changing your sexuality fundamentally. I do think that the succes levels are important. At least, for me they are. If I could become heterosexual without too much trouble, guaranteed succes, few negative side effects and were a bit younger, I might want it, but at the moment I simply see no reason to desire change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dor regarding spitzer:
Spitzer's conclusions are simply this: based on his study, there is evidence to suggest that some gay men and lesbians are not only able to change self-identity, but are able to modify core features of sexual orientation, including fantasies. |
To be able to say whether I consider credible what Spitzer has to say about this I would rather read his study than reading a comment that comments other comments. Much less so, considering the fact that this is again published by the NARTH. Personally I think both the existence of an organization like the NARTH as well as the exsistence of a scientific journal for "gay and lesbian psychotherapy" are a bit strange. This renders the fights between the two organizations largely irrelevant as far as I am concerned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dor Socarides treated patients for homosexuality throughout his career. |
Socarides is a psychoanalist. When one is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Who says that a psychoanalytical approach to homosexuality is the most suitable? The last few decades a biological approach has produced more interesting results IMO. A rather serious problem in the dicipline of psychoanalysis is that next to nothing seems provable.