the California ban of therapies to "cure" homosexuality

[marta_bee]

ETA: I have officially been convinced I was wrong. Hey, it happens!;-) Feel free to keep commenting, but do check out my recent blog post following up on this.Apparently, California has passed a law outlawing certain kinds of psychotherapies, specifically those that attempt to "cure" homosexuality

Comments

[aearwen2]

Am I over-reacting here?In a word, yes you are

[marta_bee]

Aearwen, I've read this comment more carefully after I (finally!) got done reviewing French; when I replied on FB I really was ducking in with my mind on other things. I don't think I gave it the thought it deserved

[mrowe]

What adults do, is (on the whole, or at least we hope so) their own choice, but the pressure on teens to undergo such therapy could be so enormous that, yes, they should be protected from that (leaving aside whether the therapy is even in any way effective).

Here, recently the decision was taken that a similar 'gay therapy' would no longer be covered by health insurance, though it wasn't banned.

[marta_bee]

Thanks for your points, Nath. I think you're right. The Dutch(?) approach strikes me as a good one - this seems like the kind of thing that's more elective than medically/psychologically necessary, so I'm fine with insurance not covering it.

If you're interested, I I posted a longer, more general reply on people's comments to this post here:

http://fidesquaerens.livejournal.com/123890.html

[gwynnyd]

In your example, the man *wanted* to change some part of his life, but I notice that he did NOT want to give up same-gender sex. He just wanted to feel better about his sexuality given the repressive constraints of his family and the niche of society he lives in. The kind of therapy that is being banned would not have helped him anyway.

If a person does not want to change, forcing them into "reparative therapy" to suit someone else's notion of who they should be attracted to does feel cruel to me, especially since the data shows that the therapy is basically useless.

I imagine any one choosing "reparative therapy" as it is commonly practiced to "cure the gay" does so because they feel terribly pressured by someone/something to be "normal." To not have any impulse to change and having "reparative therapy" forced on a person, especially by parents, would be more coercive than any regulation forbidding it.

[ellynn_ithilwen]

Frankly, the very idea of therapy as a "cure" for sexual orientation sickens me. (by juno)

Me too. There is nothing to be cured. Does anyone wants to "cure" his/her blue eyes and convert them to brown?
No, I didn't think so.
Well, the same is with sexual orientation. Being a gay is not a disease.

[engarian]

There is a segment of people who feel that things outside of the norm must be "cured", often by force. Too many times "interventions" have been held that are nothing short of torture. This law finally defines that as totally wrong.

I don't think that interpretation of the law would apply to the man you cited in your blog post. I think that an adult who is bi-sexual and wants psychological therapy to help him in determining his comfort level for sexual relations with either sex does not come under the heading of this "cure".

However, it is my hope that this law will save some young people from truly horrific "assistance" perpetrated by well-meaning but deluded adults. Torture is torture whether it be physical or psychological and people are fully entitled to be comfortable with their own sexual orientations.

- Erulisse (one L)