tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post113298542429851582..comments2023-10-29T06:41:23.910-07:00Comments on Halfway There: Richard Socarides is still gayZenohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09058127284297728552noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-44747036936963296652015-03-12T13:19:02.391-07:002015-03-12T13:19:02.391-07:00There is an age old say...physician heal thyself a...There is an age old say...physician heal thyself and another one where someone becomes a psychologist/psychiatrist to try and diagnose themselves.<br /><br />Here is a man 4 times divorced with a gay son who purports to cure being gay because it is caused by their upbringing.<br /><br />Akams Razor says that this man was most likely gay trying to understand himself and the string of marriages was his attempt to "cure" himself.<br /><br />I can only hope that after he left this life he looked back and wondered what the heck he was doing.....Nat Readerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13863627346454992604noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-36747432971440174092010-12-25T18:50:27.557-08:002010-12-25T18:50:27.557-08:00So, Anonymous, would you say that homophobia is al...So, Anonymous, would you say that homophobia is also a genetic psychopathology? If not, when did you choose to be homophobic? Is the inability to use a question mark a symptom of this psychopathology you have?Zenohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09058127284297728552noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-64275647580894919692010-12-20T23:04:43.664-08:002010-12-20T23:04:43.664-08:00Whether or not homosexuality is genetic is besides...Whether or not homosexuality is genetic is besides the point.Lots of aberrations or diseases are genetic.The question is,is homosexuality a developmental disorder or not.A disease or not.<br /><br />Is it a form of psychopathology--no matter what the origin.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-50321290236056175892009-08-08T02:48:20.412-07:002009-08-08T02:48:20.412-07:00"So it's genetic then? What is the gene?&..."So it's genetic then? What is the gene?"<br /><br />This follows from...what exactly? I think you blew your wad a little early there. Characteristics may be innate while only being partially heritable (e.g. handedness).<br /><br />Whether homosexuality is innate never came up above, though.<br /><br />"The infection has spread to physical sciences too: being a 'global warming denier' can put your career in jeopardy."<br /><br />To say nothing of all those poor creation scientists who are <i>Expelled</i> for going against the secularist, PC scientific orthodoxy. Stalinism!<br /><br />If you actually care about getting things correct:<br />http://residualanalysis.blogspot.com/2008/08/just-in-case-there-are-any-doubts-about.html<br /><br />"What next? Shipment to the Hague to stand trial? Welcome to the new<br />Stalinist America."<br /><br />You're kind of a drama queen, aren't you?<br /><br />"I add that the gays I've known seem to be fond of their mothers and I think they are better off for having had one male and one female for parents. So I think it is ultimately disrespectful of children's well-being to pretend that a little girl raised by two daddies or a little boy raised by two mommies is not at a disadvantage."<br /><br />Who cares what you think? Do you have any relevant data to share, or are you just blowing smoke?Escuerdnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-2345787192158197632009-06-28T10:44:11.138-07:002009-06-28T10:44:11.138-07:00I mostly agree with you, Bob A, about the insensit...I mostly agree with you, Bob A, about the insensitivity and obtuseness of the comments posted on 5/3 by Anonymous. His reliance on anecdotal "evidence" is also typical of the arguments that supposedly prove the inferiority of gay parenting. Worthless.<br /><br />He is, however, correct about one point. There <i>were</i> gay people in the late fifties and early sixties who embraced the illness argument. As Eric Marcus notes in his book <i>Making History</i>, discussing the period after World War II, "gay people explored who and what they were; debated whether they were indeed sick, as psychiatrists claimed..." The debate had two sides, with those who embraced the illness hypothesis arguing that gay people should confess to a psychological condition that did not prevent them from functioning in society. The corollary was that straight society might then be persuaded to agree that gay people could hold jobs and fit into society as well as diabetics or other people with chronic illnesses (non-contagious!).<br /><br />That position was not tenable in the long run and became a small minority viewpoint within the ranks of the gay movement. In <i>Cures</i>, Martin Duberman writes about his initial acceptance of the illness hypothesis and his conviction that the right treatment could turn him straight. Today's NARTH practitioners make a living by feeding off the remnants of the disease hypothesis, but their allies in the gay community have gone extinct and they now rely on fatuous religious arguments and narrow definitions of family values.Zenohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09058127284297728552noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-30826562636099000692009-06-28T09:49:42.582-07:002009-06-28T09:49:42.582-07:00The comment above mine is homophobic and offensive...The comment above mine is homophobic and offensive. First of all, in the 1960s, it was hetero men like Dr. Charles Socarides who advocated that gay people were psychologically sick and should be tolerated. Gay people did not advocate such nonsense but actively fought against that misguided stigma. (Shrinks of that period had quite a lucrative business trying to turn gay people straight, just like the "ex-gay" ministries of today that try to transform gay people through Jesus rather than Freud.) In fact, gay leaders of the 1960s frequently debated Charles Socarides on television (such as on The David Susskind Show) or in public forums. (It's a bit of poetic irony that Socarides raised a wonderful, healthy gay son, Richard.) Secondly, how does the creep who made the comment above this get off by saying that two mothers or two fathers aren't any bit as good or better than straight couples? Where's the data?Bob A.https://www.blogger.com/profile/06759079950670546541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-82090849746982358252009-05-03T07:52:00.000-07:002009-05-03T07:52:00.000-07:00A postscript to above:
I am old enough to remember...A postscript to above:<br />I am old enough to remember when homosexuals went on 1960s talk radio to defend the proposition that homosexuality was a disease and should be treated as such - i.e. without stigma. To be thought of as merely suffering from mental illness was a considerable step up from being viewed as immoral. In the society of those times the "it's a disease, stupid" view was probably the most humane option available. In my experience there are considerable differences between the situation of gays and straights no matter how 'tolerant' the official views of the community, and a person should feel entitled to take whatever attitude he chooses towards his sexuality. I add that the gays I've known seem to be fond of their mothers and I think they are better off for having had one male and one female for parents. So I think it is ultimately disrespectful of children's well-being to pretend that a little girl raised by two daddies or a little boy raised by two mommies is not at a disadvantage. No, it's not as bad as being raised by Charles Manson and Bernardine Dohrn, but it's not optimal.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-41817540799715245602009-05-03T07:41:00.000-07:002009-05-03T07:41:00.000-07:00So it's genetic then? What is the gene? Frankly, ...So it's genetic then? What is the gene? Frankly, nobody knows the truth about this issue and the discussion above shows us why: It manages to be fair-minded in about 40% of the sentences and in the other 60% it's just patting itself on the head for being politically correct. You can't get to the truth by being honest 40% of the time. Note that the Psychiatric and psychological associations changed their view not because of any new discoveries in genetics, neurobiology, or related disciplines, but as a result of political pressure. Such is the way of social sciences in general. Their claims are too nebulous to test and they exploit that to the max. The infection has spread to physical sciences too: being a "global warming denier" can put your career in jeopardy. What next? Shipment to the Hague to stand trial? Welcome to the new <br />Stalinist America. In fairness, it was Freud himself who jump-started the practice of seeing disagreement with his theories as a symptom of mental illness, hence as a backhanded confirmation of them. What a neat trick.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-1133213489098502462005-11-28T13:31:00.000-08:002005-11-28T13:31:00.000-08:00Good points, gentlemen. The list of dyfunctional f...Good points, gentlemen. The list of dyfunctional families with gay-hating parents is a long one. In addition to famous douchebag Alan Keyes, who is estranged from his lesbian daughter, we have anti-abortion fanatic Randall Terry who is on the outs with his gay son, and super wingnut Phyllis Schlafly, whose gay son is apparently a nice quiet boy who never contradicts his mother (his life must be hell). Then, of course, how could we forget Dick Cheney and his daughter Mary?Zenohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09058127284297728552noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868947.post-1133117025495178552005-11-27T10:43:00.000-08:002005-11-27T10:43:00.000-08:00Mr. Socarides reminds me of some other douschebags...Mr. Socarides reminds me of <A HREF="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20005-2005Feb12.html" REL="nofollow">some other douschebags</A>.Agiushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09910078364749161671noreply@blogger.com