'Counselling can change homosexuals'

[Laura M]

I couldn't believe this story when I first heard it.

A gay man in the area we live in was attacked and the wife of our First Minister, who is also an MP/MLA, was asked for her comments on a radio show. She suggested that gay people can be changed if they seek counselling and has defended her comments by saying she was "defending the word of God".

Links:

Homophobic assault victim calls for Robinson resignation - Ireland - Breaking News - Belfast Telegraph
BBC NEWS | Northern Ireland | 'Gay counselling' call rejected

A gay rights campaigner has rejected a Northern Ireland assembly member's call for homosexuals to seek psychiatric counselling.

David McCartney from the Rainbow Project was responding to comments from Iris Robinson, who is the chair of the Stormont health committee.

Mrs Robinson said with help, gay people could be "turned around".

Mr McCartney said there was "no body of evidence" to support this and asked to meet the MP.

Mrs Robinson made her comments on BBC Radio Ulster's Nolan Show on Friday.

She said she would defend her right to express religious beliefs, while also condemning violence against the gay community.


"I have a very lovely psychiatrist who works with me in my offices and his Christian background is that he tries to help homosexuals - trying to turn away from what they are engaged in," she said.

"I'm happy to put any homosexual in touch with this gentleman and I have met people who have turned around and become heterosexuals."

What her and her husband have said: BBC NEWS | Northern Ireland | Minister defends wife in gay row. Also a video with her defending her remarks.

 

[financeguy]

I couldn't believe this story when I first heard.

Well, given that it's the Robinsons, I'm surprised that you're surprised.

 

[Salome]

that video is the most disgusting thing i've seen in ages
it disturbs me that someone who actually has a proper education manages to smile while comparing homosexuals to murderers and other sinners and tops it all off with saying that she doesn't feel she said anything wrong because it's not her opinion but "the word of God"

it's sickening

 

[deep]

"How can anyone take issue with the word of God?

We are to love the sinner, not the sin."

 

[Irvine511]

i wonder if we could counsel heterosexuals?

the are two women i can think of who'd like to be done with men

but, dammit, they just aren't into va-jay-jay.

maybe counseling could help them?

 

[martha]

maybe counseling could help them?

They should try it at least.

 

[LJT]

If anyone needs any proof of the real world consequences of comments like these, they should sit in, in one of my shifts at the Samaritans...we got quite a few calls relating directly to her comments. NI has it's own little twisted version of the bible belt.

 

[A_Wanderer]

i wonder if we could counsel heterosexuals?

the are two women i can think of who'd like to be done with men

but, dammit, they just aren't into va-jay-jay.

maybe counseling could help them?

Every documentary I have seen on the subject tells me it just takes some funky music.

 

[Laura M]

If anyone needs any proof of the real world consequences of comments like these, they should sit in, in one of my shifts at the Samaritans...we got quite a few calls relating directly to her comments. NI has it's own little twisted version of the bible belt.

Alreet mucker.

How's your work there going?

 

[martha]

Every documentary I have seen on the subject tells me it just takes some funky music.

It took me damn near 45 minutes to get this.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Don't I get a for making jokes about porn

 

[Irvine511]

Every documentary I have seen on the subject tells me it just takes some funky music.

nicely done.

 

[A_Wanderer]

 

[martha]

Don't I get a for making jokes about porn

 

[A_Wanderer]

What am I

 

[LJT]

Alreet mucker.

How's your work there going?

It's going great...I might be abseiling down the front of the Europa hotel this next Saturday in aid of Samaritans, just need to hear back from the guy organising it.

 

[A stor]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but isn't a person basically born as being gay, straight or bisexual? That sexual preference is already predisposed? How would therapy change this?

I am a heterosexual female and all the "shrinks" in the world would not turn me gay. From a very early age, I liked males. My first crush was Paul McCartney as a little girl. No one say you have to feel this way. It was just natural for me to do so.

 

[melon]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but isn't a person basically born as being gay, straight or bisexual? That sexual preference is already predisposed? How would therapy change this?

I am a heterosexual female and all the "shrinks" in the world would not turn me gay. From a very early age, I liked males. My first crush was Paul McCartney as a little girl. No one say you have to feel this way. It was just natural for me to do so.

There are those who think that one can choose one's sexual orientation, just as there are those who think that blacks are born criminal, women are inherently frail, and those that thought, for sure, that the world was going to end on Y2K.

In other words, there are those that will believe any sort of nonsense, contrary to the reality, because they refuse to accept that their worldview is wrong. As such, there are those who steadfastly refuse to believe that homosexuality is not a choice or a part of nature, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary (i.e., the observation of homosexuality in animals, anthropological observations of homosexuality in native tribes that had no contact with the West or missionaries, logical theories posited on the nature of genetics which are currently being pursued and confirmed, and from--you know--actually talking with gay people), and will continue forward believing in their nonsense until the day they die.

 

[bonocrazy88]

There are those who think that one can choose one's sexual orientation, just as there are those who think that blacks are born criminal, women are inherently frail, and those that thought, for sure, that the world was going to end on Y2K.

Funny how some people use the "nature" argument for homosexuality, as in it is predetermined before birth, but as for other things, like the ones you mentioned, they are definitely not predetermined. The essentialist argument seems to stop with homosexuality, because people are so reluctant to think that *gasp* God forbid they raised a homosexual person. I don't see the big deal. To me, sexuality should be a fluid thing and shouldn't be so one-way or the other. Yes, there is homosexuality in other groups of humans and in animals. I know some people are born knowing they are not attracted to the opposite sex and knowing from a very young age they will be homosexual. But, what about people who feel that they don't want to limit themselves to one side of sexuality, which I think has soo many factors. Humans seem to want to limit sexuality to just a small selection of boxes.

 

[deep]

In other words, there are those that will believe any sort of nonsense, contrary to the reality, because they refuse to accept that their worldview is wrong. As such, there are those who steadfastly refuse to believe that homosexuality is not a choice or a part of nature, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary (i.e., the observation of homosexuality in animals, anthropological observations of homosexuality in native tribes that had no contact with the West or missionaries, logical theories posited on the nature of genetics which are currently being pursued and confirmed, and from--you know--actually talking with gay people), and will continue forward believing in their nonsense until the day they die.

I think part of the problem is equating any sexuality to sin.

Many view gay sex as sinful,
they think about it in the same way that they (especially straight men ) think they must choose not to act on their sexual desires.

That is, to have sex with as many young, random females as they can.


They choose not to act on their preference for these sexual activities.

They choose to control it, to be celibate, or to be monogamous, stay with the same routine sex partner.

if sexuality is sinful, then others can label some of us, sinners.

Remove the sin from sex and the "house of cards" collapses.

 

[financeguy]

NI has it's own little twisted version of the bible belt.

Some of these people, as I'm sure you're aware, actually studied in the Bible Belt. Ian Paisley got his degree from Bob Jones University.

Still, I would credit Paisley for certain things that he has done recently.

 

[blueeyedgirl]

What, like retiring?

 

[LJT]

Some of these people, as I'm sure you're aware, actually studied in the Bible Belt. Ian Paisley got his degree from Bob Jones University.

Still, I would credit Paisley for certain things that he has done recently.

Quite aware...i'm not sure I could ever credit Paisley with anything though...he may have mellowed but there is too much that is unforgivable. I have always found it funny that Sinn Fein and the SDLP were never dominated by religious issues and have been much more secular than the DUP...but i guess that is just in the nature of the DUP being founded by a religious fundementalist.

 

[nathan1977]

There are those who think that one can choose one's sexual orientation, just as there are those who think that blacks are born criminal, women are inherently frail, and those that thought, for sure, that the world was going to end on Y2K.

Depends. I studied queer theory in college, and the prevailing view seemed to have been that sexuality is fluid, rather than fixed -- a spectrum of sexuality, if you will. I never really understood why if it was fluid in one direction, it couldn't be fluid in another.

 

[melon]

Depends. I studied queer theory in college, and the prevailing view seemed to have been that sexuality is fluid, rather than fixed -- a spectrum of sexuality, if you will. I never really understood why if it was fluid in one direction, it couldn't be fluid in another.

A "fixed spectrum," if you will. The Kinsey scale outlined this perfectly. In that scale, there's a wide range of bisexuality in between the absolutes of heterosexuality and homosexuality, but he doesn't imply that it is anymore or less valid than the extremes.

 

[Irvine511]

A "fixed spectrum," if you will. The Kinsey scale outlined this perfectly. In that scale, there's a wide range of bisexuality in between the absolutes of heterosexuality and homosexuality, but he doesn't imply that it is anymore or less valid than the extremes.

and what's also important to note is that the apparent fluidity of sexuality is quite small for most people. while there are certainly cases of situational homosexuality, of women who have one intense lesbian relationship but wind up with men, or teenaged boys who fool around with one another, most people tend to be either 1s or 2s, or 4s or 5s.

i also have issues with some queer theory. it always felt tailored for urbanized, intellectual bisexual females (in the way that, say, Freudianism is tailored for 19th century heterosexual males). and i'd say it's underlying point, however, is not so much that sexuality is fluid, but more that there is no single, static, immutable sexual identity -- and that it resists the notion that all variations are, really, deviations and thus "lesser than."

but this does get at a tension that exists betwen lesbian sexuality and gay male sexuality. lesbians tend to have an easier time conceptualizing their sexuality on a continuum in relationship to men, male power, and women. it's not so much that women oppose biological determinism -- which makes quite a lot of sense to the vast majority of gay men -- but that women tend to have a different emotional understanding of their sexuality. when you have an emotional attraction and then attach sexual attraction to that, there's much more room for a host of sexual identities as opposed to someone who forms a sexual attraction and then grafts emotional feelings onto that. sexual attraction and response, gay or straight, seems to be more visceral for men than for women. biology just might be destiny for men, and it might not be for women.

and, FWIW, i am not queer. i dislike that word. i am gay.

i can understand the resistance to the hegemonic paradigm that needs to label various sexual identities and thusly to render one superior, the other inferior, but in the real world, i'm just not terribly concerned about where i get my label from. the shoe fits me, and i've found that i'm better off getting comfortable wearing it rather than decrying exactly why someone put a shoe on me to begin with.

 

[melon]

i also have issues with some queer theory. it always felt tailored for urbanized, intellectual bisexual females (in the way that, say, Freudianism is tailored for 19th century heterosexual males). and i'd say it's underlying point, however, is not so much that sexuality is fluid, but more that there is no single, static, immutable sexual identity -- and that it resists the notion that all variations are, really, deviations and thus "lesser than."

New Queer Cinema, which was the film offshoot of queer theory, outlines this discrepancy rather well. It generally portrays this "ideal" of being completely normatively pansexual. That's all fine and dandy, except even the directors of New Queer Cinema are almost always exclusively gay themselves--i.e., they can't live up to their ideal, due to the constraints of their own sexuality in reality. It's romanticism, frankly, and little more than that.

 

[Irvine511]

New Queer Cinema, which was the film offshoot of queer theory, outlines this discrepancy rather well. It generally portrays this "ideal" of being completely normatively pansexual. That's all fine and dandy, except even the directors of New Queer Cinema are almost always exclusively gay themselves--i.e., they can't live up to their ideal, due to the constraints of their own sexuality in reality. It's romanticism, frankly, and little more than that.

it always struck me that the ideal of "pansexual normality" was more an offshoot or outgrowth of feminism than anything else.

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

Don't I get a for making jokes about porn

Ooooh, so that's what you were talking about...

 

[U2isthebest]

and, FWIW, i am not queer. i dislike that word.

Word. I'm a straight female, and that word offends me. Seriously, what year is this? 1948?