Gay conversion therapy

James Morris-Lent said:
What is the bad algorithm? Is it Freud? There seem to be a lot of people running around thinking that with their psychoanalytical ideas they can see the matrix and stop the bullets - but they're actually the ones creating layers of mis-reality that others have to work hard to strip back.
Click to expand...

I do think it's a flaw in the hardware.
 
Article on the situation re: conversion therapy in the US.
https://www.damemagazine.com/2018/07/31/why-is-gay-conversion-therapy-still-legal/

In it a link to a report (2000)
"Therapies Focused on Attempts to Change Sexual Orientation (Reparative or Conversion Therapies)
POSITION STATEMENT

"The validity, efficacy and ethics of clinical attempts to change an individual's sexual orientation have been challenged (3,4,5,6). To date, there are no scientifically rigorous outcome studies to determine either the actual efficacy or harm of "reparative" treatments. There is sparse scientific data about selection criteria, risks versus benefits of the treatment, and long-term outcomes of "reparative" therapies."

https://web.archive.org/web/2011040...entsandRelated/PositionStatements/200001.aspx

eta:
 
I've always been baffled that anyone would care who anyone else loves and sleeps with. Maybe it's a way to maintain power by encouraging hate against certain groups of people.

I remember years ago when Jon Stewart had a famous, religious conservative on his show. MH talked about how gays choose their "lifestyle," and Jon pointed out that gays no more choose their sexuality than straight people do. MH had no response to that, which I thought was pretty telling.
 
On a triathlon forum a few years ago, some idiot was saying being gay was a choice.

I asked him to share with all what he was thinking the moment he decided to be straight.

The implication being that if he chose to be straight, that he was having gay fantasies / behaviour that he had to 'not chose'. So he, in effect, would've been admitting he was a closeted homosexual or bisexual.
 
perchance dreamer said:
I've always been baffled that anyone would care who anyone else loves and sleeps with.
Click to expand...

I think I first heard of homosexuality in 3rd grade. I recall my immediate reaction being indignation. I assumed that people were doing it to be contrarian; I was a rule-follower so breaking norms went against my sensibilities and disposition.

That view didn't last through the day it was spawned. I was not raised religious and grew up in a liberal area. Had this not been the case, I see no reason why my initial impressions would not have been affirmed and become deeply ingrained and mixed with other notions of the sort.

For what it's worth about 2/3 of American adults support same-sex marriage. I believe about 3/4 in the UK are unopposed to it. So this is a case where people are coming around, and quite quickly, at least in certain lowercase-'L'-liberal nations.
 
Ban on conversion therapy 'absolutely possible' - government 'dragging its feet', says Labour shadow home secretary
A ban on conversion therapy is "absolutely" possible and the government is "dragging its feet" by not bringing forward legislation, Labour's shadow home secretary has told ITV News.

Speaking on the Acting Prime Minister podcast, Nick Thomas-Symonds said the lack of a ban shows the government has a "blind spot on the issue".

A ban on the practice, which attempts to change or suppress a person's sexuality or gender identity, was promised by previous prime minister Theresa May and then by her successor Boris Johnson.

But three government advisers quit over a lack of progress on the issue, with one saying the government was creating a "hostile environment" for LGBT+ people.
Click to expand...
https://www.itv.com/news/2021-03-12...ng-its-feet-says-labour-shadow-home-secretary
 
Asexual people are 10% more likely, compared to other sexual orientations, to be recommended and undergo conversion therapy, according to the National LGBT survey in 2018 (UK).

Asexuality isn't included in the UK Equality Act 2010. This is the case nearly everywhere else in the world as well (New York is the only exception I'm aware of; they do mention asexuality in their sexual orientation non-discrimination act. And the Netherlands? See ETA comment below.).

This could mean that even if gay conversion therapy is banned, asexual conversion therapy might still continue.

StoneWall (the largest LGBTQIA+ rights organisation in Europe) in collaboration with activist Yasmin Benoit, are currently doing a study to collect data, which they then will use to try and create legislation and policies to protect asexual folks in many areas, including healthcare.

More info about the project here:
https://www.stonewall.org.uk/stonewall-x-yasmin-benoit-ace-project

For those of you who don't know, the psychiatric/DSM definition for hypoactive sexual desire disorder is basically the same as the definition for asexuality. But asexuality is not a mental illness or a behavioural problem, nor is it a hormonal imbalance. It's not a choice either, just like being gay or bisexual isn't a choice. It's just a natural variation in human sexuality. The DSM does allow for an exception if the patient self-identifies as asexual, but since most people (including healthcare professionals) know little to nothing about asexuality, that's a massive "if"...

ETA: If I understand this tweet correctly, as of December 2022 asexuality is now legally recognised as a sexual orientation in the Netherlands, and therefore also protected against discrimination?
 
Last edited:
RedFox said:
It's bizarre to call low or absent desire for sex a disorder. It's only a problem if it bothers you.
Click to expand...
So true. Also, asexual doesn't mean "no sexuality at all". Being asexual only means that you don't experience sexual attraction towards anyone (regardless of gender), or maybe very little and/or very rarely. The label isn't about whether you actually have sex or not. Sexual attraction is different from libido (sex drive), and some/many asexual folks do have sex and enjoy it.

I first realised how much I didn't know about this when I was reading a book that touched upon the intersectionality of disability activism, feminism and LGBTQIA+ activism. I found asexuality especially interesting in this context, seeing how often it is wrongly medicalised and psychologised, and how many common misconceptions there are.

For example, asexuality is often wrongly assumed to be a psychological response to past sexual trauma. I really don't think (hope!) anyone could get away with saying something like that about homosexuality nowadays, so why is harmful misinformation about asexuality still not being challenged more firmly?

I also learned that disabled and chronically ill asexuals are often not welcomed by other disability activists and asexual activists. It's very complicated territory, but I think the author summed it up really well:

"The disabled community has spent a long time fighting the idea that disabled people are, or should be, asexual. The asexual community has struggled for as long as it has existed to prove that asexuality has nothing to do with disability. A disabled asexual [person] complicates both these political agendas."

Ultimately, both groups are obviously fighting for the same thing: bodily autonomy as a fundamental right. It’s about power, agency and freedom of choice. Conversion therapy goes against all that.
 
Last edited:
James Morris-Lent said:
For what it's worth about 2/3 of American adults support same-sex marriage. I believe about 3/4 in the UK are unopposed to it.
Click to expand...
I just scrolled back in this thread and spotted the above. I think it was probably 2019, for Pride month, that Stonewall ran a survey in the UK which concluded that somewhere in the low 50s percent (54%?) of people supported same-sex marriage. I remember being astonished to hear that it was so low, because that wasn't the impression I'd got.
 
According to a 2012 study, of all marginalised sexualities, asexual people were "evaluated more negatively, viewed as less human, and less valued as contact partners, relative to heterosexuals and other sexual minorities". "Heterosexuals were also willing to discriminate against asexuals (matching discrimination against homosexuals)."
 
Last edited:
Council of Europe, Commissioner of Human rights: 'Nothing to cure: putting an end to so-called “conversion therapies” for LGBTI people'
https://www.coe.int/en/web/commissi...called-conversion-therapies-for-lgbti-people#

Very informative article, worth a read :thumbsup:
'There is nothing therapeutic about so-called conversion therapies.'

These are the words of a transgender (trans) person and activist who spoke with me at a recent gathering for civil society. This simple sentence reveals the insidious nature of interventions which claim that one can, and should, change a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity or expression (SOGIE). Such a notion is dangerous and has no place in a human rights-based society. Yet these interventions continue to take place across Europe, often lawfully and commonly under the guise of medical or religious tenets. Despite the profound and long-lasting harmful effects that these practices can have, many victims are left with neither recognition of the harms that they have endured nor redress. This must end. [...]
Click to expand...
"SOGIE conversion practices are discriminatory and harmful to #LGBTI people.
#CouncilofEurope states should end these practices through a comprehensive #HumanRights-based approach."
Commissioner of Human Rights said:
Click to expand...


Sadly they are still excluding people on the asexual and aromantic spectrums. I don't understand why.
Click to expand...
 
A blog post on asexual conversion therapy, by researcher Canton Winer

https://cantonwiner.substack.com/p/asexual-conversion-therapy
Canton Winer blog said:
According to the 2017 UK National LGBT Survey, asexual people are likelier than any other group under the queer umbrella to have undergone or be offered conversion therapy. 10% of asexual respondents said they’d been offered or undergone conversion therapy. Yet, when people think of conversion therapy, asexuality usually doesn’t come to mind.

Unlike other queer identities, asexual people appear most likely to encounter conversion therapy from medical professionals. Often, it’s unintentional. But even unintentional conversion therapy is harmful. [...]

Medicalized conversion therapy often involves treating asexuality (or feelings of low/no sexual interest) as the result of hormone imbalances, trauma, or mental health issues. Treating asexuality as a medical issue is a form of conversion therapy.

Medicalized conversion therapy has a long history. Asexual people aren’t the first to face it. Homosexuality was treated for decades as a medical/psychological disorder that could be “cured” through therapy (including psychotherapy, but also electric shocks, drugs, etc.).

It’s increasingly frowned upon to treat same-sex attraction as a disorder. Unfortunately, low knowledge of asexuality means many medical professionals who abhor conversion therapy accidentally offer it to asexual patients.

This version of conversion therapy might be accidental, but it’s still harmful.
Click to expand...
Some more new research data from the UK on the discrimination of asexual people, including conversion therapy, also available in a report by Yasmin Benoit and Stonewall, published in October 2023:

New research: shining a light on ‘dehumanising’ discrimination faced by ace people
https://stonewall.org.uk/about-us/news/new-research-shining-light-‘dehumanising’-discrimination-faced-ace-people
 
“In 2024, it’s time to talk about asexuality – and to finally tackle the dehumanising discrimination asexual women face”
https://www.stylist.co.uk/opinion/a...hobia-yasmin-benoit-stonewall-research/855236
When there was a national campaign to ban conversion therapy in the UK, an outcry rightfully came from the LGBTQ+ community and our allies when trans people were excluded from the proposed ban. But no such outcry came about the fact that asexual people weren’t protected by the ban, either – despite the government finding that one in 10 asexual people in the UK have been offered or have undergone conversion therapy. That worrying statistic was widely ignored, just as asexual discrimination often is. [...]

Although most people would know better than to assume that someone’s homosexuality was some kind of side effect, personality flaw, limitation or illness that needed to be cured, in my experience, asexuality isn’t granted the same degree of understanding.

I was 15 when I first heard the term ‘asexual’ as it referred to sexual orientation rather than asexual reproduction. I thought I had finally found the answer to the probing and invasive questions my peers, one that proved there was nothing ‘wrong’ with me. Little did I realise that my asexuality would be seen as the symptom or at least a cover for my ‘real’ ailment. It was assumed that a hormonal imbalance or a mental disorder must be the true cause. My development must be stunted; maybe I was ‘slow’ or responding to childhood trauma. It must be because I had supposed anti-sex attitudes; I was frigid, prude or maybe I lacked empathy or social skills. [...]

someone I met back in 2019, who cried as they told me about their experience of conversion therapy. During a routine appointment with their gynaecologist, they were asked if they were sexually active and, in reply, expressed not wanting to have sex. As a result, they were referred to a psychosexual therapist, who recommended that they undergo a physical exam of their genitals. Following the conclusion that there was nothing physically wrong, the focus shifted to identifying the ‘psychological issue’ that caused their lack of sexual attraction.

The inclination of healthcare providers to medicalise asexuality and to pathologise asexual people is rooted in queerphobia. We have seen the same thing happen to trans people and gay people throughout recent history. As far as the International Classification of Diseases (maintained by the World Health Organisation) is concerned, if you don’t experience the desire to have sex with other people, that’s a medical issue, a sexual dysfunction. On top of that, asexuality isn’t explicitly protected under the UK Equality Act 2010, which doesn’t recognise it as a sexual orientation. These glaring inequalities directly contribute to making asexual people more vulnerable to discrimination and less able to do anything about it.

[...] I heard even more accounts of asexual discrimination in healthcare. One woman told me that she had visited a doctor because her pain medication wasn’t working. Her doctor asked about her sexual activity, and she told him she was asexual. He then saw that she was also taking antidepressants and assumed that her asexuality, as well as her medical issues including period pain, were in her head. “You have complex psychological issues around sex,” he told her, and refused to send her to a gynaecologist until she saw a psychosexual therapist. Only after that therapist referred her back to a doctor was she able to continue seeking help for her medical issues.

She had to wait three months for the ‘compulsory’ therapist appointment, another three months to see the doctor for her pain, three more months to access the pelvic pain clinic and it was six-to-seven months to meet anyone in person. Overall, it took almost a year and a half after the initial GP appointment to get the help she needed because her doctor was more concerned with her asexuality. The extra year of waiting for treatment left her with extensive muscular damage to her pelvis.

Another asexual woman, who suffers from endometriosis, mentioned being asexual to her GP. As she didn’t shave her legs or stomach, the GP assumed she must have polycystic ovaries, which can cause extra hair growth and a lower sex drive. She was then subjected to six months of tests – including a stomach scan – all of which were “useless” and did not conclude that she had polycystic ovaries. During that time, she lived with continuous pain caused by endometriosis and lived in constant fear of what the true cause was. If the GP had been less focused on her asexuality, that could have been avoided. [...]

Our report contains multiple similar accounts, which reveal a pattern of asexual discrimination in healthcare. It shows that the issue mainly impacts women and people with vaginas, who are more likely to see gynaecologists and be asked about their sexual activity, thus leading to invasive questions and the inclination to ‘fix’ them. Many reported being anxious in healthcare settings and having lasting physical and psychological damage after their experiences. This, of course, is only added to the alienation that comes with being asexual in a society that doesn’t understand or accept you.

It’s time for that to change. It’s time that we put the same effort into understanding, recognising, uplifting and amplifying the asexual community as we do other parts of the LGBTQ+ community.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom