Double-speak from the Royal College of Psychiatrists

GagnonBy Robert A J Gagnon:

Double-speak from the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Britain. On the one hand, they acknowledge: “It is not the case that sexual orientation is immutable or might not vary to some extent in a person’s life” and that “sexual orientation is determined by a combination of [not only] biological [factors but also] postnatal environmental factors.” On the other hand they adamantly reject any right of patient self-determination in seeking therapeutic help to facilitate sexual orientation change, referring euphemistically to “a right to protection from therapies that … that purport to change sexual orientation.” The “right to protection” from such therapies already exists: simply don’t go to them. No one is putting a gun to the person’s head. But this Orwellian formulation by the RCP really means: We seek to prohibit anyone from seeking help in facilitating the very sexual orientation change that we have already acknowledged exists when we say that “it is not the case that sexual orientation is immutable.”
They also claim that “it is eminently reasonable that the experiences of discrimination in society and possible rejection by friends, families and others (such as employers), means that some lesbian, gay and bisexual people experience a greater than expected prevalence of mental health and substance misuse problems.” But societal discrimination doesn’t explain why active homosexual males experience significantly higher rates of STIs and numbers of sex partners lifetime even relative to homosexual females. Nor does it explain why homosexual females experience on average lower longevity in relationships and higher rates of mental health problems even in relation to homosexual males (all of whom experience the same levels of societal disapproval). The RCP statement is an exercise in ideological propaganda, pure and simple, yet even through this seemingly impenetrable grid some rays of truth manage to shine.
Note that they add: “Nevertheless, sexual orientation for most people seems to be set around a point that is largely heterosexual or homosexual. Bisexual people may have a degree of choice in terms of sexual expression in which they can focus on their heterosexual or homosexual side.” Note that they add the qualifying adverb “largely,” which fudges much of their argument. Then they bracket off this group off from “bisexual people” as if one can never move along a spectrum from, say, a category 6 homosexual to a category 4 bisexual, as if there were some impenetrable “Berlin wall” between the two groups. And doesn’t it beg the question as to who is homosexual and who is bisexual? How does a homosexual person know that he or she can never develop some heterosexual attractions before he or she has lived out a full life of experiences?
They conclude: “The College would not support a therapy for converting people from homosexuality any more than we would do so from heterosexuality.” Yet they conveniently overlook the point that heterosexual relations conform naturally to the complementary structures of male and female: anatomically, physiologically, and even psychologically. The true sexual complement to a man is a woman and to a woman a man. It takes many years of ideological indoctrination to obscure that obvious fact.
Friday, 30 May 2014 at 06:44 · Pittsburgh, PA, United States
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: