Dr. Robert Spitzer, author of the 2001 study that suggested “highly motivated” individuals could benefit from anti-gay therapy, has withdrawn the study’s conclusions.
This appears to have been the last vestige of mainstream scientific support for the claim that sexual orientation is a choice.
Nope, the anti-gay part of the bronze-age book of myths they follow has not been relegated to the “ignore” list yet (with wearing clothes made from multiple fibers being prohibited and the like).
According to the author of the original article in The American Prospect, in recent years Exodus International has already been backing off from claims that they could turn gay people straight through therapy:
I think it’s possible, although highly unusual, for someone who experiences himself as gay to undergo therapy and thereafter experience himself as straight.
Before readers descend on me in a ravening horde, please read what I said carefully.
Then add this thought:
I think it’s possible for someone who experiences himself as straight to undergo therapy and thereafter experience himself as gay.
Caveat - I do not know the details of the therapy being discussed.
However, I believe that “gay” and “straight” are on a continuum in every individual. For a certain narrow set of individuals, they exist close to the middle - they can find themselves attracted to either sex. For these individuals, who wish to - because of religious demand, for instance - suppress their homosexual desires and strengthen their heterosexual desires, I believe some types of therapy can be effective. Much like coaching for a dieter, or an AA sponsor relationship. The desires may never go away, but they can live comfortably without pursuing them. Don’t most of us live comfortably suppressing certain desires all the time?
That said, the problem lies in overstating the effectiveness of the therapies and overpromising results. But this is a risk with any treatment.
So, do we condemn the therapy outright? Or do we demand better science, and more transparency of results so that the consumer is better aware? I would say that is the path forward, regardless of Dr. Spitzer’s turnabout.
Sure, either could be the case, but not because of altering any core “sexual orientation”, but rather because of a desire to fit in or due to a poor mapping of our terminology for sexual orientation onto sexual behavior.
Or a liberal could be changed to a conservative, an atheist into a believer, a sexually reserved person into a sexual enthusiast, etc. Behavior modification therapy can be remarkably powerful, perhaps even dangerous. It should be used to help people who are in distress, not as a Procrustean “fix-all” to eliminate diversity.
Personally, I don’t care if same-sex attraction is a choice or not. Nor do I care about people’s sexual behavior*. People should be respected for who they are and what they do*. Period.
*It shouldn’t need to be stated that I mean among consenting adults, of course.
I don’t think that’s the sort of person who seeks out “gay therapy,” though. Someone who’s truly bisexual can usually live perfectly happy, fulfilled lives with a heterosexual partner, and while they may occasionally have thoughts or urges they find distressing, I don’t think it will generally become the sort of quality-of-life issue that drives someone to seek counseling, particularly for something as stigmatized as homosexuality. The people who are drawn to the ex-gay movement are, I suspect, largely pretty heavily pegged to one side of the Kinsey scale.
That’s why I stated that it can work for a narrow segment - I have seen it be successful with 2 individuals, but they were both more in the middle and had other non-sexual-oriented personal qualities that worked in their favor. I have also seen many many more where it did not work.
I’m sure that the continuum is the best way to describe the variability in sexual desire in humans, not only in the selection of the sex of a partner, but just about every other aspect of sex. But suppressing desire has to have an incredibly low success rate. I can understand that someone wants to make a choice if they have options, and may want to find ways to cope with desires they don’t want for some reason. But suppression sounds like the worst possible way to deal with it. As you mention, they may be able to live comfortably without pursuing them, but that’s not the same as suppressing them.
As far as the original question is concerned, I don’t think it’s proven that sexuality preferences are inherently defined in people in some binary mode. If people weren’t so hung up on the sex lives of others people would have a much easier time figuring out what their own sexual preferences are and not have their uniqueness be a burden in life.