The Deconstruction of marriage and family
The Deconstruction
Of Marriage and Family
By Christl Ruth Vonholdt, M.D.
Editor’s Note: Dr. Vonholdt is the director of the German Institute for Youth and Society,
GIYS. The GIYS is the study and research center of the Christian community OJC (Offensive
Junger Christen/Reichenberg Fellowship) located in Reichel -sheim/Odw., Germany.
The GIYS is involved in research, publication and counseling on the topics of human
sexuality, male and female identity formation, sexuality and culture, and marriage
and the family.
It should go without saying that an open society must be tolerant towards different lifestyles
among adults. However, the issue has long ceased to be that of tolerance, but of the
dissolution of marriage bonds and family ties. Today’s boost in social status for
homosexuality must be seen in conne ction with the social and sociopolitical tendencies
towards the deconstruction and complete redefin ition of marriage and family and the
dismantling and redesign of genders and generations.
The Deconstruction Of Genders
In recent years there was an increasing shift away from man and woman as basic
anthropological realities, towards heterosexual and homosexual identities which supposedly
exist on an equal level. However, this, too, has now become ou tmoded. For quite a while now German universities no longer offer just “Gay -Lesbian Studies”, but “Queer Studies”.
“Queer” theories deny that humankind should fall into two gender categories. 1 Instead of
acknowledging mutually complementary manhood and womanhood, such theories hold that
there are a variety of different genders which are all on a par with each other: heterosexuals,
homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, tran sgender sexuals, intersexuals and cross -dressers, to name but a few.2
The University of Hamburg has been holding public lectures on “Queer Studies” since 1999.
The declared aim of the lecture series is to “counter hetero -normativity … with something
different”. The latest publication of the series gave the fo llowing definition of the word
“queer”: “As a term in the political battle, queer stands against hetero-normativity, against the distinction of merely two genders and against patriarchal stru ctures.”3
At the same time, the new genders are to be no rigid “pigeon holes”. Rather, it is to be a
matter not just of “destabilizing the two-gender structure”, but of “removing the lack of
ambiguity of gender and of sexuality”. One suggestion is to aim for the “d iversification of
genders” and therefore to abolish completely any references to gender as a c ategory in legal
documents (e.g. in ID cards). 4
When requested to draft an official statement on the German Transsexuality Act, a number of
leading sexologists proposed that it should be possible for people to change their registered
personal status (e.g. from “male” to “female” in an ID card) if a person feels transsexual,
irrespective of whether a sex change operation has taken place. A change in personal status
and name should be subject to no more than a medical report and the person’s statement that
their “perceived gender membership” does not match their “biological gender”. 5
Within the EU the most prominent group of gay lobbyists is the International Lesbian and
Gay Association (ILGA), who have long demanded complete legal and financial equality
between homosexual, bisexual, transsexual and heter osexual lifestyles. Many of their
demands have been met already. In the European Charter of Human Rights, for example, they have succeeded in achieving a “ban on discrimination for sexual orientation”. What makes this so controversial is that, in 1994, ILGA was no longer allowed the status of an NGO (a non-governmental organization), on the grounds that three paedosexual groups belonged to it on a par with all the others. It was only upon pressure from the UN that these groups were excluded in 1994.6 In Germany, paedophiles continued to be part of the Federal Ass ociation of Homosexuals until 1997.7
The Deconstruction Of Gender Does Not Stop At Children
Especially during a person’s youth, their sexual orienta tion is very flexible and pliable.
Scientists work on the assumption that sexual orie ntation is acquired through a complex and
by no means irreversible developmental process that involves a variety of factors. A survey
among over 34,000 school children in the US came to the conclusion that 25.9% of the 12-
year-old respondents were unsure about their sexuality and their sexual orientation. 8 (In
contrast: representative studies have shown that among the adult population 2.8% of men and
1.4% of women describe themselves as homosexual.9) The question therefore remains: what
kind of lifestyle do we present to young people as a model?
Although there is no evidence whatever, the view is increasingly propagated among the
general public as well as in schools and nur sery schools that a person’s sexual orientation is
settled at an early stage, that it is irreversible and, above all, that all sexual orientations are
equally worth striving for.
For example, the government of the German state of Schleswig -Holstein has compiled a list
of children’s and young people’s books in which homosexual lifestyles are presented as
models for children from the age of 3. 10 These books can be borrowed free of charge by
schools and nursery schools. Nursery school books such as “Daddy’s R oommate”11 are
becoming more and more widespread, depicting a homosexual lifestyle as being on a par with a heterosexual marriage and indeed as a d esirable model.
The official facts-of-life brochure published by the German state of Schleswig -Holstein
emphasizes the equal value of homosexual, bisexual, tran ssexual and heterosexual lifestyles. 12
The GLEE project13, co-financed by the EU, trains teachers at seminars in conveying to
children the equal value of male/female rel ationships and sexual male/male or female/female
relationships. The book rejects any “heterosexist” approach as discriminatory. A ccording to
the GLEE project, anybody who gives a heterosexual relationship or marriage any superiority
over any other type of sexual relationship is a “heterose xist”.
The Ministry for Women, Youth, Family and Health of the German state of North Rhine -
Westphalia has developed a sex education project for schools in collaboration with a
gay/lesbian group with the aim of portraying a homosexual lifestyle as exe mplary and
desirable.14
However, while there is evidence that men and women (throughout their life!) are capable of
reducing their homosexual tendencies and that, in many cases, they can experience a change
from a homosexual orientation over to a heterosexual orientation if they strive to do so,15 this
is not mentioned in any of the projects or brochures. The authors are silent on the fact that a
“homosexual identity” is not innate, 16 that change is possible and that young people are
therefore able to choose among a variety of ways in which to handle their homosexual
feelings.
Instead, a “feeling of being different” and homo -erotic tendencies are interpreted entirely as
signs of a gay or lesbian identity. Scientific evidence suggests, however, that there are other
patterns of interpretation for such feelings, whereby the future is seen as basically open –ended and an opportunity is allowed for development along heterosexual lines. 17
Neither do these facts-of-life brochures present any discussion of the many rece nt studies
which show so clearly that there is a significantly higher proportion of psychological
problems among men and women with homosexual lifestyles than among those with
heterosexual lifestyles.18 Moreover, only inadequate warnings are presented abou t the
significantly higher rate of sexually transmitted diseases among men with homosexual or
bisexual behaviour and about the fact that this rate is currently on the i ncrease.19
One must welcome the desire to convey uncond itional acceptance and loving ca re towards
young people who “feel different” and who have homo -erotic tendencies. However, accepting a person is not the same as the approval of homosexual or bisexual behaviour. Also, what is taught is not merely tolerance towards different lifestyles, bu t the equal value and the levelling of all sexual lifestyles.
Many young people feel a measure of insecurity about their sexual identity and are rather
apprehensive about encounters with the opposite sex. Such youngsters are now receiving a
new “mental map” from early childhood onwards: what is pr esented to them as a desirable
model is no longer marriage between man and woman and thus a family, but other sexual
lifestyles on the same level. This new “mental map” can significantly impair the heterosexual
development of a young person and even block it altogether. It can only add to the diffusion
of identities in the next generation and in fact make it more difficult for youn gsters to find
their true identities.
The Dissociation Of Family From Marriage
If one observes developments from a strategic standpoint, what initially took place was a
dissociation of “marriage and family” so that, subsequently, “family” and “marriage” could be viewed as totally separate phenomena. This alone made it possible to get to a point where,
nowadays, nearly everyone talks of “same -sex marriages”. Although the new law, passed by
the German government, is not called a “Marriage Act” but a “Life Partnership Act”, “gay
politicians” had been “persistently … pressurizing for an exact copy of marriage”20
(accordingly to the Hamburg expert on family law, Eva Marie von Münch, and numerous
others). A number of leading legal e xperts in Germany believe that the new act is mo delled on marriage in nearly all aspects. 21 The fact that marriage presupposes a community between a man and a woman is increasingly seen as a “prohibition of marriage” and “discrimination”
against those with a homosexual lifestyle. It is disputed that the basic structure of marriage
requires two different genders as an a nthropological (and not just a sociological) reality.
Although the German Constitution still specifies marriage b etween man and woman - at least
formally - as the only model, there are increasing demands that say: “More and more people
live as heterosexuals, as homosexuals or as bisexuals, as couples, in groups or on their own.
… The state must give equal legal and financial treatment to all lifestyles among adults.” 22
What can be regarded as the latest climax in the dismantling policy of marriage and fami ly is
an attempt by the German Green Party in the state of Schleswig -Holstein. In March 2002 the
Greens conducted a virtual party convention in which a proposal was put forward to change
Article 6 Para. 1 of the German Constitution. The original wording is : “Marriage and the
family are under the special protection of state regulations.” According to the Green Party
proposal, this is to be replaced by: “Children and the family are under the special protection of state regulations.” This would sever the link between marriage and family. As a result, the
procreation of new life, too, would be dise ngaged from the relationship between man and
woman and from the creative state of tension b etween the two. It would effectively call into
question the whole concept of motherhood and fatherhood.
Eliminating The Procreation Of New Life From The Creative Tension Between Genders
Reproduction scientists, gay/lesbian groups and others are advocating the establishment of
sperm banks and free access to such banks for couples , regardless of whether they are in a
homosexual or heterosexual relationship. They are also suppor ting the donation of human
eggs and surrogate motherhood.
The Lesbian and Gay Association in Germany demands in its new “Family Book”: “Lesbian
and gay couples with children have a right to full re cognition as families. Discrimination
against lesbian and gay families must come to an end. They must be put on an equal level in
legislation on tax, on social benefit and on names. (…) So far women in Germany have no
free access to sperm banks outside of marriage. This is discriminatory. The right to set up a
family must apply to everyone.” 23
In 2001 a brochure was published by the Senate of the German state of Berlin, titled
“Rainbow Families - When Parents are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual or Transsexual”. In this
brochure, the Senate demands equal rights for parents living in le sbian, gay, bisexual and
transsexual relationships,24 asserting that “equal adoption rights are the yardstick for
measuring the equality of lesbians and gays…”25
As early as 1996 the Berlin Senate made a number of prescriptive recommendations about therearing of children by couples living in homosexual partnerships. 26 To provide evidence for the alleged harmlessness of such an environment for c hildren, the Senate referred to a variety of studies. However, none of these studies provides ev idence that a homosexual partnership is harmless for children, and the authors fail to mention negative effects on children living in homosexual households.27 No mention is made of the many studies that provide evidence for the significant disadvantages that are suffered by children who grow up, for instance, withouta father.28
In Colorado, USA, a court of law recently ruled that on the birth certificate of a c hild growingup with two women in a lesbian partnership, the names of both “mothers” may be entered under “parents”, without requiring any fu rther names.29
Without being noticed by the general public, a complete reinterpretation of language is
currently taking place. Yet if a society calls something ma rriage that is not and refers to
something as a family that cannot be a family, it imposes an added burden on its children and
deprives them of their right to an origin - their right to have a mother and father.
Under the pretext of building up families, the family is in fact being destroyed, and so is its
integration into the sequence of generations. 30
The Deconstruction Of Generations
Dr. Helmut Graupner is a member of ILGA-Europe and a leading representative of the
Austrian gay movement. In 2002 he fought a case in the European Court of Human Rights
wherein the age of consent for homosexual activ ities between adults and young people should be reduced to 14 in Austria. Graupner demands in an internationall y renowned magazine not only that sex with children above 14 should be regarded as a gay rights issue, but also that sex with children under 14 should be exempt from criminal punis hment in individual cases.31
The current legal policy spokesman of the German Green Party demanded as early as 1988:
“The cementing of a sexually repressive climate… can only be prevented by a mobilization of the gay movement for equality between homo - and heterosexuality which, unlike
paedosexuality, is totally unproblematic. Th e achieving of this is a prerequisite for the future
battle to ensure at least the partial decriminalisation of paed osexuality.”32
Today, therefore, we are faced with the fact that not only gender membership, but indeed the
difference between generations is being denied, with the resulting destruction of a sheltered
environment required by children.
An Alliance For Marriage And Family
Do we still have enough courage and conviction to present to our children and youngsters the
concepts of masculinity and femininity, maleness and femaleness as a dual structure of
humanity where man and woman are complementary, in need of one another, directed
towards each other and in which they form the basis for the future - a dual structure that is
visibly expressed in the cultural estate of marriage?
It is so important that there should be peace b etween the genders and the generations. But how can it be achieved if we sever the link between marriage and family, and if children no longer experience this peace lived out between mother and father in everyday life? The world view of our children will be determined by our success or failure in achieving this peace.
Throughout the history of mankind, in all cultures and religions, the term marriage has only
ever been applied to the liaison between a man and a woman who, in principle, are prepared
to give birth to children.
If “marriage” today is to be a matter of either a heterosexual or homosexual couple living
together and “family” simply a matter of children living t ogether with one or more adults,
then we are undermining a significant pillar of the very basis of our society. The levelling of
gender differences and of the creative tension between man and woman as well as the denial
of the sequence of generations and the differences between them amounts to the termination
of a fundamental anthropological consensus and eventually the destruction of our civilization.
We need a new “alliance for marriage and family” - for the sake of the next generation.
Notes:
1 Heidel, U. et al., Jenseits der Geschlechtergrenzen, Männerschwarmscript-Verlag, Hamburg
2001.
2 Heidel, U., op.cit., p. 19.
3 Heidel, U., op.cit., p. 19.
4 Heidel, U., op.cit., pp. 346ff.
5 Becker, P. et al., “Stellungnahme zur Anfrage des Bundesministeriums des Inne rn vom 11.
Dezember 2000 zur Revision des Transsexuellengesetzes”, in Zeitschrift für Sexualforschung,
issue 3, 2001, pp. 258-268.
6 CultureFacts, February 7, 2002, published by FRC, Washington D.C. http://www.frc.org.
7 See Braun, J., Schlußwort, in: JZ 23, 2002, p. 295.
8 Remafedi, G. et al, “Demography of Sexual Orientation in Adolescents”, in: Pediatrics, vol.
89, no. 4, 1992, pp. 714-721.
9 Robert T. Michael, John H. Gagnon, Edward O. Lauman and Gina Kolata: Sex in America:
A Definitive Survey, NY Warner Books, New York 1994. According to a study conducted in
Germany in 2001, only 1.3% of men and 0.6% of women describe themselves as homosexual.
Eurogay-Emnid Study 2001, “Schwules Leben in Deutschland”, press releases, p. 17.
10 Gleichgeschlechtliche Lebensweisen, Bücherverzeichnis, published by Ministerium für
Justiz, Frauen, Jugend und Familie [Ministry for Justice, Women, Youth and Family],
Schleswig-Holstein, 2001.
11 Willhoite, Michael: Daddy’s Roommate. Alyson Publications 1991 (deutsch: Papa’s
Freund, Berlin 1994)
12 Sexuelle Orientierung. Thema für die Jugendhilfe, published by Ministerium für Frauen,
Jugend, Wohnungs- und Städtebau [Ministry for Women, Youth, Housing and Urban
Construction], Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel 2000.
13 “GLEE Project”, http://glee.oulus.fi/project.html.
14 See Amtsblatt des Ministeriums für Schule, Wissenschaft und Forschung des Landes
Nordrhein-Westfalen [Ministry for Schools, Science and Research of the state of North Rhine -
Westphalia], Düsseldorf, 53rd year, no. 11, 2001.
15 See Spitzer, R. “New Study on Sexual Reorientation Therapies” in: Bulletin, No. 2,
Autumn 2001, German Institute for Youth and Society, Postfach 1220, D -64382
Reichelsheim, email: institute@ojc.de.
16 For instance: Da fiel ich aus allen Wolken - Informationen für Eltern homosexueller
Kinder, published by Ministerium für Frauen, Jugend, Wohnungs - und Städtebau [Ministry
for Women, Youth, Housing and Urban Construction], Schleswig -Holstein, Kiel 1999.
17 See Nicolosi, J: Reparative Therapy of Male Homose xuality - A New Clinical Approach,
Jason Aronson, Northvale 1991; Nicolosi, J.: Healing Homosexuality, Jason Aronson,
Northvale, 1993.
18 Fergusson, D.M. “Is sexual orientation related to mental health problems and suicidality in
young people?”, Arch. Gen. Psychiatry, vol. 56, Oct. 1999, S. 876-880; Sandfort, T. et al.,
“Same-Sex Sexual Behavior and Psychiatric Disorders: Findings from the Netherlands Mental
Health Survey and Incidence Study (NEMESIS)”, Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 58, 2001, S. 85-91;
O’Leary, D., “Why the Homosexual Lifestyle offers No Model for Children”, Bulletin, No. 3,
Spring 2002, German Institute for Youth and Society, Postfach 1220, D -64382 Reichelsheim,
email: institute@ojc.de.
19 Dannecker, M., “Erosion der HIV-Prävention?” In: Zeitschrift für Sexualforschung, 15th
year., issue 1, 2002, pp. 58-64, and, more recently: “Der harte Schanker kehrt nach Paris
zurück”, Frankfurter Rundschau 17.5.2002: The number of syphillis sufferers has quadrupled
within a year. 90% of those affected are homosexually active men.
20 “Mit heißer Nadel - Die Hamburger Familienrechtsexpertin Eva Marie von Münch über
die Verfassungsklage der Länder Bayern und Sachsen gegen die Homo -Ehe”, Der Spiegel 28,
2001, p. 40.
21 Braun, J., Ehe und Familie am Scheideweg, Eine Kritik des sogenannten
Lebenspartnerschaftsgesetzes, S. Roderer Verlag, Regensburg 2002.
22 Christina Schenk (PDS), member of the German Parliament, during a consultation on the
Life Partnership Act on July 7, 2000, quoted by Braun, J., op.cit., p. 21.
23 Press release of February 25, 2002, http://www.lsvd.de.
24 “Regenbogenfamilien - Wenn Eltern lesbisch, schwul, bi - oder transsexuell sind”,
published by Senatsverwaltung für Arbeit, Soziales und Frauen (Senate Administration for
Labour, Social Affairs and Women), Berlin 2001.
25 “Regenbogenfamilien ...”, op.cit. p. 27.
26 www.sensjs.berlin.de/familie/gleichg/Doku16/start.htm.
27 For instance: Sarantakos, S.: “Children in three contexts”, Chidren Australia vol. 21, no. 3,
1996, pp. 23-31.
28 For instance Franz, M. et al.: “Wenn der Vater fehlt. Epidemiologische Befunde zur
Bedeutung früher Abwesenheit des Vaters für die psychische Gesundheit im späteren Leben”,
Zeitschrift für Psychosomatische Medizin 45, 1999, pp. 260-278.
29 CultureFacts, April 18, 2002 published by FRC, Washington D.C. http://www.frc.org.
30 See Amendt, G., “Die Bedeutung der Familie - wie sie begründen?”,www.igg.uni -
bremen.de.
31 Graupner, H., “Love vs. Abuse: Crossgenerational Sexual Relations of Minors: A Gay
Rights Issue?” in: Journal of Homosexuality, vol. 37, no. 4, 1999, pp. 203-215.
32 Beck, V., “Das Strafrecht ändern?”, in A. Leopardi: Der pädosexuelle Komplex, Berlin
1988, p. 268.
© 2002 Dr. Christl Ruth Vonholdt
Deutsches Institut für Jugend und Gesellschaft – German Institute for Youth and Society
64382 Reichelsheim
Germany
www.dijg.de
institute@dijg.de
The Deconstruction of marriage and family
The Deconstruction
Of Marriage and Family
By Christl Ruth Vonholdt, M.D.
Editor’s Note: Dr. Vonholdt is the director of the German Institute for Youth and Society,
GIYS. The GIYS is the study and research center of the Christian community OJC (Offensive
Junger Christen/Reichenberg Fellowship) located in Reichel -sheim/Odw., Germany.
The GIYS is involved in research, publication and counseling on the topics of human
sexuality, male and female identity formation, sexuality and culture, and marriage
and the family.
It should go without saying that an open society must be tolerant towards different lifestyles
among adults. However, the issue has long ceased to be that of tolerance, but of the
dissolution of marriage bonds and family ties. Today’s boost in social status for
homosexuality must be seen in conne ction with the social and sociopolitical tendencies
towards the deconstruction and complete redefin ition of marriage and family and the
dismantling and redesign of genders and generations.
The Deconstruction Of Genders
In recent years there was an increasing shift away from man and woman as basic
anthropological realities, towards heterosexual and homosexual identities which supposedly
exist on an equal level. However, this, too, has now become ou tmoded. For quite a while now German universities no longer offer just “Gay -Lesbian Studies”, but “Queer Studies”.
“Queer” theories deny that humankind should fall into two gender categories. 1 Instead of
acknowledging mutually complementary manhood and womanhood, such theories hold that
there are a variety of different genders which are all on a par with each other: heterosexuals,
homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, tran sgender sexuals, intersexuals and cross -dressers, to name but a few.2
The University of Hamburg has been holding public lectures on “Queer Studies” since 1999.
The declared aim of the lecture series is to “counter hetero -normativity … with something
different”. The latest publication of the series gave the fo llowing definition of the word
“queer”: “As a term in the political battle, queer stands against hetero-normativity, against the distinction of merely two genders and against patriarchal stru ctures.”3
At the same time, the new genders are to be no rigid “pigeon holes”. Rather, it is to be a
matter not just of “destabilizing the two-gender structure”, but of “removing the lack of
ambiguity of gender and of sexuality”. One suggestion is to aim for the “d iversification of
genders” and therefore to abolish completely any references to gender as a c ategory in legal
documents (e.g. in ID cards). 4
When requested to draft an official statement on the German Transsexuality Act, a number of
leading sexologists proposed that it should be possible for people to change their registered
personal status (e.g. from “male” to “female” in an ID card) if a person feels transsexual,
irrespective of whether a sex change operation has taken place. A change in personal status
and name should be subject to no more than a medical report and the person’s statement that
their “perceived gender membership” does not match their “biological gender”. 5
Within the EU the most prominent group of gay lobbyists is the International Lesbian and
Gay Association (ILGA), who have long demanded complete legal and financial equality
between homosexual, bisexual, transsexual and heter osexual lifestyles. Many of their
demands have been met already. In the European Charter of Human Rights, for example, they have succeeded in achieving a “ban on discrimination for sexual orientation”. What makes this so controversial is that, in 1994, ILGA was no longer allowed the status of an NGO (a non-governmental organization), on the grounds that three paedosexual groups belonged to it on a par with all the others. It was only upon pressure from the UN that these groups were excluded in 1994.6 In Germany, paedophiles continued to be part of the Federal Ass ociation of Homosexuals until 1997.7
The Deconstruction Of Gender Does Not Stop At Children
Especially during a person’s youth, their sexual orienta tion is very flexible and pliable.
Scientists work on the assumption that sexual orie ntation is acquired through a complex and
by no means irreversible developmental process that involves a variety of factors. A survey
among over 34,000 school children in the US came to the conclusion that 25.9% of the 12-
year-old respondents were unsure about their sexuality and their sexual orientation. 8 (In
contrast: representative studies have shown that among the adult population 2.8% of men and
1.4% of women describe themselves as homosexual.9) The question therefore remains: what
kind of lifestyle do we present to young people as a model?
Although there is no evidence whatever, the view is increasingly propagated among the
general public as well as in schools and nur sery schools that a person’s sexual orientation is
settled at an early stage, that it is irreversible and, above all, that all sexual orientations are
equally worth striving for.
For example, the government of the German state of Schleswig -Holstein has compiled a list
of children’s and young people’s books in which homosexual lifestyles are presented as
models for children from the age of 3. 10 These books can be borrowed free of charge by
schools and nursery schools. Nursery school books such as “Daddy’s R oommate”11 are
becoming more and more widespread, depicting a homosexual lifestyle as being on a par with a heterosexual marriage and indeed as a d esirable model.
The official facts-of-life brochure published by the German state of Schleswig -Holstein
emphasizes the equal value of homosexual, bisexual, tran ssexual and heterosexual lifestyles. 12
The GLEE project13, co-financed by the EU, trains teachers at seminars in conveying to
children the equal value of male/female rel ationships and sexual male/male or female/female
relationships. The book rejects any “heterosexist” approach as discriminatory. A ccording to
the GLEE project, anybody who gives a heterosexual relationship or marriage any superiority
over any other type of sexual relationship is a “heterose xist”.
The Ministry for Women, Youth, Family and Health of the German state of North Rhine -
Westphalia has developed a sex education project for schools in collaboration with a
gay/lesbian group with the aim of portraying a homosexual lifestyle as exe mplary and
desirable.14
However, while there is evidence that men and women (throughout their life!) are capable of
reducing their homosexual tendencies and that, in many cases, they can experience a change
from a homosexual orientation over to a heterosexual orientation if they strive to do so,15 this
is not mentioned in any of the projects or brochures. The authors are silent on the fact that a
“homosexual identity” is not innate, 16 that change is possible and that young people are
therefore able to choose among a variety of ways in which to handle their homosexual
feelings.
Instead, a “feeling of being different” and homo -erotic tendencies are interpreted entirely as
signs of a gay or lesbian identity. Scientific evidence suggests, however, that there are other
patterns of interpretation for such feelings, whereby the future is seen as basically open –ended and an opportunity is allowed for development along heterosexual lines. 17
Neither do these facts-of-life brochures present any discussion of the many rece nt studies
which show so clearly that there is a significantly higher proportion of psychological
problems among men and women with homosexual lifestyles than among those with
heterosexual lifestyles.18 Moreover, only inadequate warnings are presented abou t the
significantly higher rate of sexually transmitted diseases among men with homosexual or
bisexual behaviour and about the fact that this rate is currently on the i ncrease.19
One must welcome the desire to convey uncond itional acceptance and loving ca re towards
young people who “feel different” and who have homo -erotic tendencies. However, accepting a person is not the same as the approval of homosexual or bisexual behaviour. Also, what is taught is not merely tolerance towards different lifestyles, bu t the equal value and the levelling of all sexual lifestyles.
Many young people feel a measure of insecurity about their sexual identity and are rather
apprehensive about encounters with the opposite sex. Such youngsters are now receiving a
new “mental map” from early childhood onwards: what is pr esented to them as a desirable
model is no longer marriage between man and woman and thus a family, but other sexual
lifestyles on the same level. This new “mental map” can significantly impair the heterosexual
development of a young person and even block it altogether. It can only add to the diffusion
of identities in the next generation and in fact make it more difficult for youn gsters to find
their true identities.
The Dissociation Of Family From Marriage
If one observes developments from a strategic standpoint, what initially took place was a
dissociation of “marriage and family” so that, subsequently, “family” and “marriage” could be viewed as totally separate phenomena. This alone made it possible to get to a point where,
nowadays, nearly everyone talks of “same -sex marriages”. Although the new law, passed by
the German government, is not called a “Marriage Act” but a “Life Partnership Act”, “gay
politicians” had been “persistently … pressurizing for an exact copy of marriage”20
(accordingly to the Hamburg expert on family law, Eva Marie von Münch, and numerous
others). A number of leading legal e xperts in Germany believe that the new act is mo delled on marriage in nearly all aspects. 21 The fact that marriage presupposes a community between a man and a woman is increasingly seen as a “prohibition of marriage” and “discrimination”
against those with a homosexual lifestyle. It is disputed that the basic structure of marriage
requires two different genders as an a nthropological (and not just a sociological) reality.
Although the German Constitution still specifies marriage b etween man and woman - at least
formally - as the only model, there are increasing demands that say: “More and more people
live as heterosexuals, as homosexuals or as bisexuals, as couples, in groups or on their own.
… The state must give equal legal and financial treatment to all lifestyles among adults.” 22
What can be regarded as the latest climax in the dismantling policy of marriage and fami ly is
an attempt by the German Green Party in the state of Schleswig -Holstein. In March 2002 the
Greens conducted a virtual party convention in which a proposal was put forward to change
Article 6 Para. 1 of the German Constitution. The original wording is : “Marriage and the
family are under the special protection of state regulations.” According to the Green Party
proposal, this is to be replaced by: “Children and the family are under the special protection of state regulations.” This would sever the link between marriage and family. As a result, the
procreation of new life, too, would be dise ngaged from the relationship between man and
woman and from the creative state of tension b etween the two. It would effectively call into
question the whole concept of motherhood and fatherhood.
Eliminating The Procreation Of New Life From The Creative Tension Between Genders
Reproduction scientists, gay/lesbian groups and others are advocating the establishment of
sperm banks and free access to such banks for couples , regardless of whether they are in a
homosexual or heterosexual relationship. They are also suppor ting the donation of human
eggs and surrogate motherhood.
The Lesbian and Gay Association in Germany demands in its new “Family Book”: “Lesbian
and gay couples with children have a right to full re cognition as families. Discrimination
against lesbian and gay families must come to an end. They must be put on an equal level in
legislation on tax, on social benefit and on names. (…) So far women in Germany have no
free access to sperm banks outside of marriage. This is discriminatory. The right to set up a
family must apply to everyone.” 23
In 2001 a brochure was published by the Senate of the German state of Berlin, titled
“Rainbow Families - When Parents are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual or Transsexual”. In this
brochure, the Senate demands equal rights for parents living in le sbian, gay, bisexual and
transsexual relationships,24 asserting that “equal adoption rights are the yardstick for
measuring the equality of lesbians and gays…”25
As early as 1996 the Berlin Senate made a number of prescriptive recommendations about therearing of children by couples living in homosexual partnerships. 26 To provide evidence for the alleged harmlessness of such an environment for c hildren, the Senate referred to a variety of studies. However, none of these studies provides ev idence that a homosexual partnership is harmless for children, and the authors fail to mention negative effects on children living in homosexual households.27 No mention is made of the many studies that provide evidence for the significant disadvantages that are suffered by children who grow up, for instance, withouta father.28
In Colorado, USA, a court of law recently ruled that on the birth certificate of a c hild growingup with two women in a lesbian partnership, the names of both “mothers” may be entered under “parents”, without requiring any fu rther names.29
Without being noticed by the general public, a complete reinterpretation of language is
currently taking place. Yet if a society calls something ma rriage that is not and refers to
something as a family that cannot be a family, it imposes an added burden on its children and
deprives them of their right to an origin - their right to have a mother and father.
Under the pretext of building up families, the family is in fact being destroyed, and so is its
integration into the sequence of generations. 30
The Deconstruction Of Generations
Dr. Helmut Graupner is a member of ILGA-Europe and a leading representative of the
Austrian gay movement. In 2002 he fought a case in the European Court of Human Rights
wherein the age of consent for homosexual activ ities between adults and young people should be reduced to 14 in Austria. Graupner demands in an internationall y renowned magazine not only that sex with children above 14 should be regarded as a gay rights issue, but also that sex with children under 14 should be exempt from criminal punis hment in individual cases.31
The current legal policy spokesman of the German Green Party demanded as early as 1988:
“The cementing of a sexually repressive climate… can only be prevented by a mobilization of the gay movement for equality between homo - and heterosexuality which, unlike
paedosexuality, is totally unproblematic. Th e achieving of this is a prerequisite for the future
battle to ensure at least the partial decriminalisation of paed osexuality.”32
Today, therefore, we are faced with the fact that not only gender membership, but indeed the
difference between generations is being denied, with the resulting destruction of a sheltered
environment required by children.
An Alliance For Marriage And Family
Do we still have enough courage and conviction to present to our children and youngsters the
concepts of masculinity and femininity, maleness and femaleness as a dual structure of
humanity where man and woman are complementary, in need of one another, directed
towards each other and in which they form the basis for the future - a dual structure that is
visibly expressed in the cultural estate of marriage?
It is so important that there should be peace b etween the genders and the generations. But how can it be achieved if we sever the link between marriage and family, and if children no longer experience this peace lived out between mother and father in everyday life? The world view of our children will be determined by our success or failure in achieving this peace.
Throughout the history of mankind, in all cultures and religions, the term marriage has only
ever been applied to the liaison between a man and a woman who, in principle, are prepared
to give birth to children.
If “marriage” today is to be a matter of either a heterosexual or homosexual couple living
together and “family” simply a matter of children living t ogether with one or more adults,
then we are undermining a significant pillar of the very basis of our society. The levelling of
gender differences and of the creative tension between man and woman as well as the denial
of the sequence of generations and the differences between them amounts to the termination
of a fundamental anthropological consensus and eventually the destruction of our civilization.
We need a new “alliance for marriage and family” - for the sake of the next generation.
Notes:
1 Heidel, U. et al., Jenseits der Geschlechtergrenzen, Männerschwarmscript-Verlag, Hamburg
2001.
2 Heidel, U., op.cit., p. 19.
3 Heidel, U., op.cit., p. 19.
4 Heidel, U., op.cit., pp. 346ff.
5 Becker, P. et al., “Stellungnahme zur Anfrage des Bundesministeriums des Inne rn vom 11.
Dezember 2000 zur Revision des Transsexuellengesetzes”, in Zeitschrift für Sexualforschung,
issue 3, 2001, pp. 258-268.
6 CultureFacts, February 7, 2002, published by FRC, Washington D.C. http://www.frc.org.
7 See Braun, J., Schlußwort, in: JZ 23, 2002, p. 295.
8 Remafedi, G. et al, “Demography of Sexual Orientation in Adolescents”, in: Pediatrics, vol.
89, no. 4, 1992, pp. 714-721.
9 Robert T. Michael, John H. Gagnon, Edward O. Lauman and Gina Kolata: Sex in America:
A Definitive Survey, NY Warner Books, New York 1994. According to a study conducted in
Germany in 2001, only 1.3% of men and 0.6% of women describe themselves as homosexual.
Eurogay-Emnid Study 2001, “Schwules Leben in Deutschland”, press releases, p. 17.
10 Gleichgeschlechtliche Lebensweisen, Bücherverzeichnis, published by Ministerium für
Justiz, Frauen, Jugend und Familie [Ministry for Justice, Women, Youth and Family],
Schleswig-Holstein, 2001.
11 Willhoite, Michael: Daddy’s Roommate. Alyson Publications 1991 (deutsch: Papa’s
Freund, Berlin 1994)
12 Sexuelle Orientierung. Thema für die Jugendhilfe, published by Ministerium für Frauen,
Jugend, Wohnungs- und Städtebau [Ministry for Women, Youth, Housing and Urban
Construction], Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel 2000.
13 “GLEE Project”, http://glee.oulus.fi/project.html.
14 See Amtsblatt des Ministeriums für Schule, Wissenschaft und Forschung des Landes
Nordrhein-Westfalen [Ministry for Schools, Science and Research of the state of North Rhine -
Westphalia], Düsseldorf, 53rd year, no. 11, 2001.
15 See Spitzer, R. “New Study on Sexual Reorientation Therapies” in: Bulletin, No. 2,
Autumn 2001, German Institute for Youth and Society, Postfach 1220, D -64382
Reichelsheim, email: institute@ojc.de.
16 For instance: Da fiel ich aus allen Wolken - Informationen für Eltern homosexueller
Kinder, published by Ministerium für Frauen, Jugend, Wohnungs - und Städtebau [Ministry
for Women, Youth, Housing and Urban Construction], Schleswig -Holstein, Kiel 1999.
17 See Nicolosi, J: Reparative Therapy of Male Homose xuality - A New Clinical Approach,
Jason Aronson, Northvale 1991; Nicolosi, J.: Healing Homosexuality, Jason Aronson,
Northvale, 1993.
18 Fergusson, D.M. “Is sexual orientation related to mental health problems and suicidality in
young people?”, Arch. Gen. Psychiatry, vol. 56, Oct. 1999, S. 876-880; Sandfort, T. et al.,
“Same-Sex Sexual Behavior and Psychiatric Disorders: Findings from the Netherlands Mental
Health Survey and Incidence Study (NEMESIS)”, Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 58, 2001, S. 85-91;
O’Leary, D., “Why the Homosexual Lifestyle offers No Model for Children”, Bulletin, No. 3,
Spring 2002, German Institute for Youth and Society, Postfach 1220, D -64382 Reichelsheim,
email: institute@ojc.de.
19 Dannecker, M., “Erosion der HIV-Prävention?” In: Zeitschrift für Sexualforschung, 15th
year., issue 1, 2002, pp. 58-64, and, more recently: “Der harte Schanker kehrt nach Paris
zurück”, Frankfurter Rundschau 17.5.2002: The number of syphillis sufferers has quadrupled
within a year. 90% of those affected are homosexually active men.
20 “Mit heißer Nadel - Die Hamburger Familienrechtsexpertin Eva Marie von Münch über
die Verfassungsklage der Länder Bayern und Sachsen gegen die Homo -Ehe”, Der Spiegel 28,
2001, p. 40.
21 Braun, J., Ehe und Familie am Scheideweg, Eine Kritik des sogenannten
Lebenspartnerschaftsgesetzes, S. Roderer Verlag, Regensburg 2002.
22 Christina Schenk (PDS), member of the German Parliament, during a consultation on the
Life Partnership Act on July 7, 2000, quoted by Braun, J., op.cit., p. 21.
23 Press release of February 25, 2002, http://www.lsvd.de.
24 “Regenbogenfamilien - Wenn Eltern lesbisch, schwul, bi - oder transsexuell sind”,
published by Senatsverwaltung für Arbeit, Soziales und Frauen (Senate Administration for
Labour, Social Affairs and Women), Berlin 2001.
25 “Regenbogenfamilien ...”, op.cit. p. 27.
26 www.sensjs.berlin.de/familie/gleichg/Doku16/start.htm.
27 For instance: Sarantakos, S.: “Children in three contexts”, Chidren Australia vol. 21, no. 3,
1996, pp. 23-31.
28 For instance Franz, M. et al.: “Wenn der Vater fehlt. Epidemiologische Befunde zur
Bedeutung früher Abwesenheit des Vaters für die psychische Gesundheit im späteren Leben”,
Zeitschrift für Psychosomatische Medizin 45, 1999, pp. 260-278.
29 CultureFacts, April 18, 2002 published by FRC, Washington D.C. http://www.frc.org.
30 See Amendt, G., “Die Bedeutung der Familie - wie sie begründen?”,www.igg.uni -
bremen.de.
31 Graupner, H., “Love vs. Abuse: Crossgenerational Sexual Relations of Minors: A Gay
Rights Issue?” in: Journal of Homosexuality, vol. 37, no. 4, 1999, pp. 203-215.
32 Beck, V., “Das Strafrecht ändern?”, in A. Leopardi: Der pädosexuelle Komplex, Berlin
1988, p. 268.
© 2002 Dr. Christl Ruth Vonholdt
Deutsches Institut für Jugend und Gesellschaft – German Institute for Youth and Society
64382 Reichelsheim
Germany
www.dijg.de
institute@dijg.de
France MP Fined for Criticizing Homosexuality Under “Hate Speech” Law
France MP Fined for Criticizing Homosexuality Under “Hate Speech” Law
Former Soviet dissident warns democracy being rapidly dismantled in Europe
By Gudrun Schultz
PARIS, France, January 26, 2007 - A member of France’s ruling party has been fined almost $4,000 for comments opposing homosexuality, under the country’s hate speech law.
Christian Vanneste was fined by a court in Douai, in northern France, and charged an additional $2,000 in court fees.
The case stemmed from comments Vanneste made in 2004, when the mayor of a small southwestern community performed a homosexual “marriage”, later declared illegal. Vanneste said homosexuality was “inferior” to heterosexuality and said the practice would be “dangerous for humanity if it was pushed to the limit.”
Three homosexual and lesbian activist groups filed suit against Vanneste under the law criminalizing the incitement of hatred against minorities--homosexuality had recently been included under that law.
The case marks the first instance where the law has been used to bring charges against a member of Parliament, after it was adapted two years ago to prohibit speech against homosexuality.
The introduction of “hate speech” laws in France and Britain symbolize the dismantling of democracy that is rapidly underway in Europe, a former Soviet dissident and key witness against the Soviet Communist Party warned last fall in Brussels.
Comparing the ideologically-driven policies of the European Union with the record of Communist Russia, Vladimir Bukovsky said the EU’s enforcement of political correctness was a symbol of the Union’s slide toward a similar oppressive regime.
“The Soviet Union used to be a state run by ideology. Today’s ideology of the European Union is social-democratic, statist, and a big part of it is also political correctness,” Mr. Bukovsky said in an interview with Paul Belien for the Brussels Journal. “I watch very carefully how political correctness spreads and becomes an oppressive ideology…Look at this persecution of people like the Swedish pastor who was persecuted for several months because he said that the Bible does not approve homosexuality.”
While he acknowledged that a significant gulf still separated EU policy enforcement from the oppressive control of the Soviet regime, Mr. Bukovsky warned that European countries are nonetheless under enormous pressure to conform to EU ideology.
Vanneste said he will appeal the ruling to the European Court of Human Rights.
'Science' Games Gay-Activists Play
'Science' Games Gay-Activists Play
On an article by Wainright & Patterson (Journal of the Family, 2006) [1]
By Gerard J. M. van den Aardweg, Ph.D.
(Editor's Note: The following analysis by Dr. van den Aardweg is of the recent study, "Delinquency, Victimization, and Substance Use Among Adolescents With Female Same-Sex Parents," published by the Journal of Family Psychology, Vol. 20, No. 3, pgs 526-530.)
Dr. Gerard van den Aardweg:
As it is well-known, activist homosexuals and lesbians devote their lives to their Great Ideal: scientifically establishing the normality of their orientation.
A dubious brand of what passes for academic psychology provides them with marvelous tools for that, namely, unvalidated, quick-and-easy (and mostly ad hoc) questionnaires, oral or self-administered. With a few questions, you can "assess" everything you want, from personality traits to motherhood qualities. It saves you the trouble of collecting systematic, long-term, everyday-life observations by experienced independent observers, and of in-depth exploration (in a series of interviews) taken by impartial professionals who know what to ask [2]. So, if you want to prove that children reared by lesbian couples are not worse off than children from normal marriages--pardon, from different "types of family"--recruit a number of volunteering lesbian mothers-with-lover who can be expected to share the Great Ideal, and ask them and their privileged child a few questions regarding their relationship with each other and the child's behavior.
Then, adorn the "surprisingly" positive outcome with a dose of psycho-babble to the effect that your scientific findings "suggest" that "family type" is not "a major factor" for a child's "development and behavior," and the product is ready for the gay activist arsenal: Gay parents function excellently!
The latest report by Jennifer Wainright and Charlotte Patterson (the latter who is well-known for her creative method of sampling), resembles a specific sort of Dutch cheese: It is full of holes. The difference, however, is that it has a bad taste. For, although fatally full of holes from the viewpoint of sound methodology, it helps promoting falsities about the beneficence of gay parenting. Objectively, it is child-hostile.
The holes. The statement is that the development of children reared by lesbian mothers with a lesbian friend at home or nearby is not harmed because a small group of these children (mean age 15 years) do not report more delinquency, more smoking, drinking and drug abuse than teenagers with normally married parents.
Where the mother says she has an "understanding" relationship with her child, the probability of a child's risk behavior is significantly reduced, the mother's sexual orientation does not matter.
The first big hole, of course, is the ridiculous assertion that 15-year-olds who do not steal or use violence and do not smoke, drink, or abuse drugs more than others are, therefore, developing normally and healthily. This can only be found out by longitudinal in-depth studies of the whole emotional life, relationships and personality development well into adulthood, not by having teenagers answer some questions about a few specific risk behaviors. Besides, when an adolescent does not smoke etc., nor manifests antisocial behavior at 15, he or she may do so at 18; and the emotional problems of children reared by gay parents are quite likely to predispose them to later problem behaviors, alcohol or drug abuse not excepted.
A second hole is the way risk behavior has been assessed. The youngsters had to tell it themselves. How dependable are such answers of boys and girls with an openly lesbian mother who knows that her family situation is being examined? Children of that age are most likely to pull the shutters down when confronted with direct questions related to the painful subject of their private circumstances [3]. Still less valid is the assessment of the quality of the mother-child relationship taking the mothers' words as measure.
These lesbian mothers, as anyone knows who has some experience here, are defensive and full of rationalizations for their choices. Apart from that, they often do not really see and understand the needs of their children. Parents who are driven by the desire to prove a sociological point see the world as revolving around that cause--not the real needs and true feelings of their children.
I must add (as far as motherhood feelings) that is not an exception that a lesbian woman has not come to maturity, due to unresolved gender ambiguities, so that some of them are hardly aware of the emotional confusion and other sufferings her gay partnership will cause her children.
Here are a few more holes. The 44 lesbian mothers are volunteers, a selective group that is no doubt eager to show how normally their households are functioning. No reason to generalize whatever is reported for them to all similarly-composed households. The control group is matched, among other things, for adoption. How many of the 46 children involved were adoptive children? And how many years did all these children of lesbian mothers-with-lovers, adoptive or not, live together with their mother and her lover?
In the case of divorced lesbian mothers: What part of their childhood did these children live together with mother and father? What is the relationship of these children with their father? (It may be of substantial importance in some such cases, as I have witnessed.) As to the children of divorced parents, are there siblings at present not living any more with the lesbian mother, but with the father, the mother having taken with her the child who was most adapted to her and leaving the child who gave her problems? Or what of the child who could not accept her relationship to the father, as sometimes happens in these cases? In all, this sample of lesbian mothers looks like a mishmash of cases and backgrounds. It is not a clean sample of lesbian mothers who lived together in one household with one lover from the child's birth on and thus cannot be compared with the situation in most normal marriages (Moreover, if there is more than an exceptional case of adoption in the "focal" lesbian sample, the control group, also containing a number of adoptive children, is skewed as well.) Finally, lumping boys and girls together may blot out sex-specific reactions of adolescents to the influences of a lesbian mother and/or her lover(s).
Being brought up by an openly lesbian mother and her partner, without the influence of the father, is by no means harmless, as is falsely "suggested" in this amateurish piece of family psychology. A short illustration is in order.
Sabine, 21-years old, tells the sad story of her childhood in a newspaper interview, motivated by her wish to warn the ignorant public against gay parenting [4]. When she was six, her parents divorced and she practically did not see her father again. Her mother started a lesbian relationship and took her friend in the home. "I never understood what mother wanted from this woman and why she ran after her." Sabine did not like the "new one": "I didn't have the opportunity to really build a relation with my mother... she stood between us." Sabine never had the feeling that her mother was really there for her. Until now, she misses her intimacy: "I wish I would succeed in making her clear that a mother-child relationship is something very special. Something vulnerable."
Her mother feels wronged that Sabine does not treat her friend like herself, but according to Sabine, "she does not understand she is my mother and no one else."
As a child, Sabine did not yet clearly perceive how problematic her mother's lifestyle was to her. Now, she does: "I didn't learn what a relationship is." Her sexual identity is disturbed. She thought it normal to fall in love with a girl, but in fact she couldn't. And "I just didn't perceive the other sex. Not at all." In adolescence, "that (the other sex) was an aspect that was completely fallen away" and it stayed that way.
Theoretically, she knows a family would be ideal, but she has no erotic feelings, neither for women, nor for men, and feels utterly incapable to rear a child. Moreover, she fears to transmit her own unsolved problems--inhibited communication and disturbed sexual identity--to that child.
Adoption by gay couples she says is "extremely dangerous. For at first, children do not notice that they suffer from it. But the problems come in the course of time." [5] At school, she "couldn't identify with the other children" and withdrew in herself. It was very painful. Sabine only spoke of her "parents," not of her mother and her friend. She tried as much as she could to prevent others from learning about her mother's lifestyle, but her mother manifested herself openly as a lesbian; for example, appearing with her friend at school meetings. The teachers did not seem to make much of it (very "open-minded" and "politically correct"), but Sabine couldn't understand why "everyone accepted it as normal." In vain, she tried to persuade herself that it didn't matter if one grows up with a gay or a hetero couple. For a long time, she also repressed the wish for a father, although she gradually became aware of how much she had objectively missed him.
This seriously damaged young woman teaches a simple lesson that many (pseudo-) psychologists and psychiatrists should be deeply ashamed of for having neglected to teach: "Society must see the roles of the sexes more consciously and be aware how important they are."
Of course, all damage by gay parenting will be blamed on malignant homophobia and not on the mothers, who may imagine to love their children, but, in fact, do them serious injustice. They sacrifice their children, who are so vulnerable because they naturally love their mothers, on the altar of their "homophilia." If this is not psychological violence, child abuse, what is? How many Sabines must be produced before this collective moral insanity will be stopped?
That activist lesbians play "psychological-research" games to justify their lifestyle and push their revolutionary agenda is one thing. That their scribblings are apparently accepted so easily for publication in professional periodicals--in spite of their scientific worthlessness--is even harder to understand, unless we must assume that the editors of those periodicals decided to become the humble servants of the gay and lesbian movement.
Gerard van den Aardweg, Ph.D., studied psychology at Leiden University and received his Ph.D. in psychology at Amsterdam University (1967) with a dissertation on homosexuality and neurosis. He has a private psychotherapeutic practice since 1963 in Holland, specializing in the treatment of homosexuality and marriage problems. He has written for many publications in these fields, and he has authored several books on homosexuality, including On the Origin and Treatment of Homosexuality (N.Y., Praeger, 1986) and The Battle for Normality (Ignatius Press). Dr. van den Aardweg is a member of NARTH's Scientific Advisory Committee.
References:
[1] Wainright, Jennifer L., and Patterson, Charlotte J., "Delinquency, victimization, and substance use among adolescents with female same-sex parents." Journal of the Family, 2006, 20, 3, 526-530.
[2] A good example of the use of such relevant methods is the longitudinal study by J.S. Wallerstein and S. Blakeslee on the psychological consequences of divorce both in parents and children (Second Chances. New York: Ticknor & Fields, 1989).
[3] For example, children give a much more rosy picture of their reactions and feelings when interviewed relatively shortly after their parents' divorce than 12 years later. One of the reasons is that they, especially the girls, "bury their feelings" because they do not want to hurt the parent with whom they grow up (A. Napp-Peters: Familien nah der Scheidung --Families after Divorce-. München: A. Kustmann, 1995).
[4] Die Tagespost (Germany), 2004, July 17, p. 9.
[5] All emphasis mine.
Bisexual Feminist Describes Her Journey Back To Monogamy
Bisexual Feminist Describes
Her Journey Back To Monogamy
October 24, 2006 - Self-described feminist bisexual L.M. Hake, writing in Off Our Backs (11/1/05) describes her journey from bisexuality through polyamory and back to monogamy in the essay, "The journey back ... to monogamy." Hake describes how she first began attending a bisexual support group in the late 1980s and says she "... knew that I was home. It was like my shoes had been on the wrong feet, and they were now switched right. I did not have to be one, I did not have to be the other. I was what I was. .... I concluded that if I could desire both, then I must have both."
Hake says this new awareness made her believe that "limits seemed arbitrary, and, well limiting. Rules were made by people who agreed on them, nothing more." In her "newfound queer, alternative community, the core values were honesty, open communication, and respect. Monogamy seemed quaint and foreign."
As a bisexual, Hake dated both men and women at the same time. She noticed, however, that even while dating in honest relationships, "I was jealous. I was resentful. I was hurt. ... I spent a lot of time quietly upset."
She also saw "evidence of and heard frank tales about relationships shattered by third or fourth partners. I saw triads dissolve faster than couples. I watched committed polyamorists abandon 'the life' for the one partner they ultimately wanted to commit themselves to. And, I watched people continue to explore and celebrate various designs. I watch polyamory work."
Hake says two incidents "nudged" her back to monogamy. One was a comment made by a friend who told her that she could never get all of her needs met by multiple partners. The other was finding a man who demanded monogamy from her. "He was worth it, and although I wasn't quite ready to shun polyamory, I was bruised and tired enough to shun the fight for it."
According to Hake, "I began to realize that my life could not be designed by a good theory or even by what I witnessed in the world around me. Trite as it sounds, I had to follow my heart."
She concludes: "I'm not a poster child for monogamy. In spite of my varied relationship history - and my best efforts to the contrary - I am if anything a serial monogamist. And I have probably spent more time single than partnered in any form. But I know what I want, and what I have wanted for many years: to cherish, and be cherished by, one other person."
School Spies Should Report Anti-Homosexuality to Police, Says UK Home Office
School Spies Should Report Anti-Homosexuality to Police, Says UK Home Office
By Gudrun Schultz
LONDON, United Kingdom, January 2, 2006 Students and parents should report schools to the police for “homophobic hate crimes”, if the institutions fail to adequately address anti-homosexual beliefs and language among the student body, a new report by the Home Office said last week.
The paper defined “homophobia”--a word manufactured by homosexual activist groups to identify opposition to their movement--as “resentment, or fear, of gay and lesbian people,” including “just a passive dislike of gay people,” according to a report by This London.
"Schools can be a little concerned about a negative impact on their reputation, that it would be perceived as a school which has problems rather than one which deals with them positively," the report said.
Urging that school incidents be reported to a "hate crime co-ordinator", the report said it would be “dangerous to assume that homophobic incidents do not occur in a particular school as victims and witnesses might be too worried or frightened to bring the abuse to greater attention."
According to This London’s report, homosexual lobby groups have reacted to the trend among teenagers who use the word “gay’ as a common insult, divorced from any awareness of the actual sexual orientation of the person they are insulting.
The report was called “desperate” by Colin Hart of the Christian Institute.
"There is an element of desperation about this advice, Hart said. “No-one wants to see any kind of bullying in schools. But this is not about bullying of pupils who others think are homosexual. It is about punishing schools unless they try to stop pupils using "gay" as a perjorative word."
Among the Home Office recommendations was the creation of “third party reporting centres” set up by homosexual activist organizations, who could act as collecting points for information on “homophobic” incidents to pass on to police, from individuals who might be reluctant to contact the police themselves.
Police should maintain a record of the names and personal details of those individuals identified as anti-homosexual by the activist groups, the report said.
As well, the Home Office called for school officials to incorporate lessons against anti-homosexuality into school timetables, and to institute homosexual “awareness weeks.”
The report was endorsed by Lancashire Assistant Chief Constable Michael Cunningham--one week earlier Cunningham’s force was required to pay £50,000 in damages to elderly couple Joe and Helen Roberts, who complained of police abuse of power after they were questioned in their home for opposing homosexuality. The Roberts’ had complained to their local council about its open endorsement of homosexual “rights.”
See coverage by This London:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23379756-details/Homophobia+spies+in+the+classroom/article.do
Age of Consent at 14 Makes Canada Favoured gay Tourism Destination
Age of Consent at 14 Makes Canada Favoured gay Tourism Destination
By Hilary White
OTTAWA, December 19, 2006 – A newly released report says that the age of consent for vaginal sex in Canada – currently set at 14 – has made this country a favorite destination for child-sex “tourism”. The Global Monitoring Report on the Status of Action against the Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children, says that Canada’s age of consent has made Canada a haven for pedophiles.
The report was issued by the Bangkok-based organization, End Child Prostitution, Child Pornography and Trafficking of Children for Sexual Purposes, or ECPAT International. It gives Canada 17 recommendations, including raising the age of consent from 14 to 16.
EPCAT International monitors and studies the problem of child sexual exploitation around the world. The Global Monitoring Report says that legal action is not enough and that a culture of sexual exploitation of children has arisen around the world in recent years, particularly in media imagery and the internet. This, the group says, coincides with trends of children being frequently victimized by adults for commercial sex, “under the wrongful concept of their ability to consent to exploitation.”
The report recommends that “all children up to the age of 18 …be afforded legal protection from commercial sexual exploitation.”
A bill to raise the age of consent, one of the first to be put forward by Canada’s Conservative government, passed second reading in the House of Commons in October.
Federal Justice Minister Vic Toews told the CBC that Americans are being prosecuted under US laws for using Canada as a sex-tourism destination. “It's ironic in Canada we can't prosecute them, and yet Americans coming here and taking advantage of our children, when they go back, can face criminal prosecutions and lengthy imprisonment." Toews told the CBC.
The CBC report quotes Toronto police constable, Paul Krawczyk, who said, “I've been in pedophile chat rooms that discuss Canada having such a low age of consent that they tell other pedophiles to travel to Canada because of that. Sixty-year-olds engaging in sexual activities with 14 or 15-year-olds is not appropriate.”
The federal government’s proposal to raise the age of consent in Canada from 14 to 16 was vocally opposed by homosexual advocacy groups who accused the government of attacking the sexual freedoms of young people.
As a longtime proponent of raising the age of consent, Toews responded in June when the government tabled their bill, “Adults who sexually prey upon young people are the targets of these reforms, not consenting teenagers.”
The proposed legislation includes a close-in-age clause that means young people 14 or 15 can have sexual relations with someone “less than five years older.”
The sides are clearly lined up in the war over child-protection and the age of consent. After the Conservatives tabled the bill, the Coalition For Lesbian And Gay Rights In Ontario and the Sex Laws Committee said raising the age would discriminate against the sexual choices of gay youth.
Planned Parenthood Ottawa and the Canadian AIDS Society also criticized the bill saying it would interfere with efforts to educate youth about pregnancy, disease prevention and sexual rights.
This February, the homosexual activist group EGALE (Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere), asked the government to lower the age of consent for anal sex to 16 from its current 18, saying that the difference only served to “stigmatize gay men.”
Following this, in November, a Liberal Party policy resolution, attributed to the British Columbia branch of the Party, called for the lowering of the age of consent for anal sex.
Pedofilia i gay lobiji
On the Pedophilia Issue:
What the APA Should Have Known
By Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D. and Dale O'Leary
Deconstructionists argue that distinctions between the genders are arbitrary and political. Now, the same argument is being advanced by man-boy love advocates about the distinction between the generations.
An article published last summer in the American Psychological Association's Psychological Bulletin has drawn a recent firestorm of criticism. Talk show hosts and congressmen are calling for investigations. The outrage has focused on the authors' conclusion, based on their analysis of child-molestation studies, that "the negative effects [of sexual abuse] were neither pervasive nor typically intense."
The article was entitled "A Meta-analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples."
APA spokeswoman Rhea Faberman defended publication of the article as part of the scientific work of the organization, saying, "We try to create a lot of dialogue." She labeled "ridiculous" the claim of radio talk-show host Dr. Laura Schlessinger that publication of the article and the attempt to normalize pedophilia were in any way related.
Contrary to Ms. Faberman's assertion, however:
1. There is a real and growing movement to legitimize and also legalize sexual relations between boys aged 10 to 16 and adult males;
2. Robert Bauserman, one of the authors of the article, has associated himself with the pedophilia movement through a previous article;
3. The movement's strategy is to promote the "objective" study of child/adult sex, free of moral considerations;
4. The APA should have known this before they published the article.
Those who are interested in legalizing sexual relations between adults and children want to change the parameters of the discussion from the "absolutist" moral position, to the "relative" position that it can sometimes be beneficial. The A.P.A. article furthered exactly this position.
Deconstructionists have argued--with some success--that distinctions between the genders are arbitrary and politically motivated. Now, the same argument is being advanced about the distinction between the generations.
In a recent lead article of the Journal of Homosexuality (1), for example, Harris Mirkin says the "sexually privileged" have disadvantaged the pedophile through sheer political force in the same way that blacks were disadvantaged by whites before the civil-rights movement.
The Movement to Legitimize Pedophilia
In 1981, Dr. Theo Sandfort, co-director of the research program of the Department of Gay and Lesbian Studies at the University of Utrecht, Netherlands, interviewed 25 boys aged 10 to 16 who were currently involved in sexual relationships with adult men. The interviews took place in the homes of the men.
According to Sandfort, "For virtually all the boys ... the sexual contact itself was experienced positively..." Could an adult-child sexual contact, then, truly be called positive for the child? Based on the research presented, Sandfort answered that question in the affirmative.
The study was severely criticized by experts in the field of child sexual abuse. Dr. David Mrazek, co-editor of Sexually Abused Children and Their Families, attacked the Sandfort research as unethical, saying:
"In this study, the researchers joined with members of the National Pedophile Workshop to 'study' the boys who were the sexual 'partners' of its members ... there is no evidence that human subject safeguards were a paramount concern. However, there is ample evidence that the study was politically motivated to 'reform' legislation.
"These researchers knowingly colluded with the perpetuation of secret illegal activity ... In the majority of cases, these boys' parents were unaware of these sexual activities with adult men, and the researchers contributed to this deception by their action."
Child sexual-abuse expert Dr. David Finkelhor also criticized the Sandfort research, pointing to the numerous studies which show adult-child sexual contact as a predictor of later depression, suicidal behavior, dissociative disorders, alcohol and drug abuse, and sexual problems.
Dr. Finkelhor strongly defended laws against child/adult sex, saying that many of those now-grown children are very active in lobbying for such protection.
In 1990, the campaign to legalize man-boy sex was furthered by the publication of a two-issue special of the Journal on Homosexuality, reissued as Male Intergenerational Intimacy: Historical, Socio-Psychological, and Legal Perspectives.
This volume provided devastating information on the way psychologically immature pedophile men use vulnerable boys who are starved for adult nurturance and protection.
In the forward, Gunter Schmidt decries discrimination against and persecution of pedophiles, and describes
"successful pedophile relationships which help and encourage the child, even though the child often agrees to sex while really seeking comfort and affection. These are often emotionally deprived, deeply lonely, socially isolated children who seek, as it were, a refuge in an adult's love and for whom, because of their misery, see it as a stroke of luck to have found such an 'enormously nurturant relationship'."
There is another deeply disturbing article in the volume, revealingly titled, "The Main Thing is Being Wanted: Some Case Studies on Adult Sexual Experiences with Children." In it, pedophiles reveal their need to find a child who will satisfy their desire for uncritical affirmation and a lost youth. One of the men justifies his activity as a search for love, and complains that: "Although I've had physical relationships with probably, I don't know, maybe a hundred or more boys over the years, I can only point to four or five true relationships over that time."
The volume also contains an introductory article which decries society's anti-pedophile sentiment. The authors complain about the difficulty studying man-boy relationships in "an objective way," and they hope the social sciences will adopt a broader approach which could lead to understanding of the "diversity and possible benefits of intergenerational intimacy."
Bauserman Defends Sandfort's Research
The same volume contains an article by Robert Bauserman-co-author of the A.P.A. study--which complains that objective research is impossible in a social climate that condemns man-boy sexual relationships. Bauserman decries the prevailing ideology that labels all boys as "victims" and all adult pedophiles as "perpetrators." He attacks researchers Mzarek and Finkelhor as being driven by a "particular set of beliefs about adult-juvenile sex." Bauserman looks for a new "scientific objectivity," with the explicit call for research that will challenge the social-moral taboo against adult/child sex. The meta-analysis which he co-authored, and which the American Psychological Association published, can be seen as Bauserman's follow-up to his Journal of Homosexuality article.
More Recent Defenses of Pedophilia
Harris Mirkin recently wrote a lead article in the Journal of Homosexuality entitled "The Pattern of Sexual Politics: Feminism, Homosexuality and Pedophilia." Using social-constructionist theory, he argues that the concept of child molestation is a "culture- and class-specific creation" which can and should be changed.
He likens the battle for the legalization of pedophilia to the battles for women's rights, homosexual rights, and even the civil rights of blacks.
He sees the hoped-for shift as taking place in two stages. During the first stage, the opponents of pedophilia control the debate by insisting that the issue is non-negotiable--while using psychological and moral categories to silence all discussion.
But in the second stage, Mirkin says, the discussion must move on to such issues as the "right" of children to have and enjoy sex.
If this paradigm shift could be accomplished, the issue would move from the moral to the political arena, and therefore become open to negotiation. For example, rather than decrying sexual abuse, lawmakers would be forced to argue about when and under what conditions adult/child sex could be accepted. Once the issues becomes "discussible," it would only be a matter of time before the public would begin to view pedophilia as another sexual orientation, and not a choice for the pedophile.
The response to the APA article shows that for the present, social opposition to pedophilia continues to be strong. Finkelhor's response to Bauserman, which was included in Male Intergenerational Intimacy, explains why:
"Some types of social relationships violate deeply held values and principles in our culture about equality and self-determination. Sex between adults and children is one of them. Evidence that certain children have positive experiences does not challenge these values, which have deep roots in our worldview."
To pedophile advocates, any discussion of the benefits of child-adult sex is a victory. The APA should have understood this, should have known about Bauserman's connections, and should have been well aware of--and vocally resistent to--the growing movement to legalize pedophilia.
Endnote
Mirkin, Harris, "The Pattern of Sexual Politics: Feminism, Homosexuality and Pedophilia," Journal of Homosexuality vol. 37(2), 1999, p. 1-24.
Pedofilia i incest, pozitivno iskustvo-tvrde gay psiholozi i psihijatri
International Academy of Sex Research Joins the Debate: Is Pedophilia a Mental Disorder?
In an issue of the Archives of Sexual Behavior--the official journal of the International Academy of Sex Research--some clinicians argue that "unusual sexual interests" should not be considered mental disorders.
Bruce Rind, author of the 1998 meta-analysis that claimed to find little or no harm in man-boy sex, joins the discussion; other commentators disagree.
By Linda Ames Nicolosi
The Archives of Sexual Behavior published a special edition in December 2002 to discuss whether pedophilia should remain a mental disorder.
Opening the debate was Richard Green, M.D., J.D. a widely known writer specializing in homosexuality and gender-identity issues. Green argued in favor of removing pedophilia from the diagnostic manual (DSM).
Green was one of the clinicians who, in the 1973, took the side of gay activists to argue for removing homosexuality from the diagnostic manual.
In a second article in the Archives, "The Dilemma of the Male Pedophile," Gunter Schmidt, D. Phil., makes a sympathetic case for the pedophile who, Schmidt says, must "remain abstinent for significant periods of time" and "lead a life of self-denial at significant emotional cost." Schmidt calls for a new, "enlightened discourse on morality" with the recognition that "in view of the pedophile's burden, the necessity of denying himself the experience of love and sexuality," he deserves society's respect.
Furthermore, Schmidt argues, molested children do not always appear to be harmed. A 1998 study by Bruce Rind, he notes, found that many boys grow up to have positive or neutral memories of their man-boy sexual experiences.
The Issue of "Consent"
Many of the commentators in the Archives argued that children are usually too emotionally immature to offer valid consent for sex with an adult. But the issue of ability to give valid consent is not the point at all, another writer responded--for no parent asks his child for his "consent" before baptizing him into a church.
A number of the commentators indicated their disapproval of the moral influences exerted on society by its Judeo-Christian heritage, which has traditionally stigmatized child sexuality.
Psychiatrist Richard C. Friedman, the author of Male Homosexuality: A Contemporary Psychoanalytic Perspective and a number of related research papers, says that it would be "more helpful than harmful" to continue to view pedophilia as a mental disorder because we know so little about adult-child sex at this time, and because of the potentially harmful age and power discrepancy between children and adults. But he closes his commentary by urging that society not "discriminate" against people who are sexually attracted to children.
Looking at the issue historically, argues psychologist Robert Prentky, the age for sexual consent used to be age ten in England until about 100 years ago. So when, Prentky asks, is "a child no longer a child?" Certainly there are some 12-year-olds, he says, who are mature enough to give valid consent for sex. Prentky also observes that some of our culture's most beloved heroes were "clearly pedophiles" --including, he says, the authors of the children's classics Peter Pan and Alice in Wonderland.
The debate in the Archives provides an eye-opening view into the philosophical reasoning employed in the ongoing debate about what should be the defining criteria for mental illness.
Criteria for Mental Illness
Why should pedophilia not be considered a mental illness? Richard green makes the case by considering several factors.
Distress. One of the criteria for mental illness is subjective distress - and, Green notes, many pedophiles are not distressed about their attractions at all--except, he notes, about being the possibility of being jailed. In fact, "some celebrate their interests, organize politically, and publish magazines or books."
Disability. Considering another marker of illness, "disability," Green says, psychiatry must not let itself be locked into the narrow definition of disability currently dictated by our culture. When we broaden our view to consider other cultures over time, Green explains, we see that many African tribes and even the ancient Greeks considered man-boy pedophilia to be a helpful rite-of-passage into manhood.
Animal Behavior. Looking at normality from the perspective of our animal relatives, Dr. Green looks at a close genetic relative, the pygmy chimp, or bonobo. Studies show that the bonobo has erotic contact with babies of its own species. And that behavior isn't likely harmful to the babies, Green says, because it's the babies themselves that often initiate the sex play.
Frequency of Occurrence. Green says that contrary to popular myth, pedophile attractions aren't even especially unusual. Studies prove that many so-called "normal" men with conventional sexual interests can, in fact, be sexually aroused in a laboratory setting when they are shown erotic photos of little girls.
Is the pedophile a dysfunctional person? No, Green says; in truth, there appear to be quite a number of "highly skilled pedophiles" - in fact, even some beloved public figures--so a simple explanation of "social inadequacy" doesn't explain their psychological condition.
Taken together, Green says, these findings converge on the conclusion that pedophilia is not a mental disorder - at least "not unless we declare a lot of people in many cultures and in much of the past to be mentally ill."
A Change in Worldviews
Dr. Gunther Schmidt counters that the Western world was once dominated by Judeo-Christian principles, and we used to judge particular sex acts like adultery, sodomy, and sado-masochistic sex as intrinsically wrong. But now those old "prejudices," he says, are fading away.
What anyone decides to do sexually with another person is today considered morally acceptable as long as a valid agreement is negotiated. But because the child is usually too immature to give his "consent," pedophilia must continue to be seen as harmful.
However, Schmidt notes, even though the child is too young to agree to sex, it's certainly not, in fact, true that harm always results from child molestation. Even some boys who were actually forced into sex with a man against their will, Schmidt says, later remember those experiences as having been "favorable to their development" and "interesting and enjoyable."
And because an attraction to children is a basic part of the pedophile's identity--in other words, "who he is"-- the pedophile's self-denial of gratification is, in fact, "tragic."
Others Say the Issue of "Consent" is Irrelevant
Among those writers who opted for retaining pedophilia in the DSM, the majority made their argument against adult-child sex on the grounds of the age and power discrepancy between the partners. But not all of the writers in the Archives agreed that a power imbalance renders a relationship psychologically harmful or even subjectively unsatisfying.
For example, psychiatrist Emil Ng, M.D. of the University of Hong Kong says that in ancient Chinese history, children are described as "natural sexual beings," and romances are portrayed with children as young as ten years old in sexual relationships with each other, or with adults--and "sex play is viewed as beneficial to their healthy development."
Is lack of "consent" a valid reason to call pedophilia harmful? No, Dr. Ng notes, "the seemingly righteous and humanitarian debate on child self-determination" is nothing more than "another game adults play to impose their own values on children."
After all, Ng notes, "How often do the adults [in the West] try to ascertain 'valid consent' from their children before getting them to do most things?" For example, have parents "sought valid 'consent' from their children before baptizing them soon after birth?"
"Unequal Relationships Are Not Necessarily Unprincipled"
Dr. Paul Okami of UCLA agrees that a power imbalance should not be the deciding issue. History is full of examples, he notes, of unequal relationships that "work" for the individuals involved--for example, a professor and his student marry "and live happily ever after." An unequal relationship doesn't violate principles of justice or fairness in sexual relationships, Dr. Okami says, "unless one views sexual relationships as similar to hand-to-hand combat."
Actually, he says, the real problem in pedophilia traces back to Christianity. People "detest" pedophilia because Christianity has given our culture a restrictive attitude toward the "naturalistic" child and his sexual instincts.
Christianity, Okami says, "regards children as sinful heathens who need the devil beat out of them. The end result is a powerful desire to save priceless, lovable, sacred innocents from something dangerous, dirty, disgusting and sinful."
Dr. Bruce Rind agrees with Dr. Ng and Dr. Okami that lack of consent from the child doesn't necessarily mean adult-child sexual relationships are harmful. (Dr. Rind was the lead author of the 1998 study that was attacked in the media by radio personality Dr. Laura Schlessinger. The Rind study concluded that there was little or no psychological harm in man-boy sexual relationships.)
Dr. Rind notes that many other societies, today and in the past, have endorsed sex between a man and a boy. And, what is necessarily wrong with a power imbalance?
After all, Rind says, some parents force their children to go to church! And couldn't religious indoctrination, for that matter, be harmful to the child?
Even Man-Boy Incest May Be Remembered Positively, Says Rind
To back up his claim that pedophile relationships can be consensual, Rind describes several cases of men who say they benefited from--and even initiated--their childhood sexual experiences, including a "positive" recollection of father-son incest.
One boy had several relationships with men, starting when he was age 11, "all of which he viewed as very positive. He thinks the sex helped his sexual self-confidence; as he matured, he knew exactly what he wanted in sex, while his peers were still searching."
Another man saw the childhood intimacy he had with a man as the "highlight of his life."
Still another boy started having sex with his own father at age ten, and now (he is 33 years old) he looks back on their incestuous relationship as "beautiful, pure" and full of love. He said he "cherished the intimacy."
Dr. Charles Moser--the clinician who was invited to present a paper at the May 2003 American Psychiatric Conference on pedophilia--supported Rind's observations. Psychiatry, he said, is ethically obliged to help those people who have unusual sexual interests pursue their subjective ideal of personal fulfillment.
"Any sexual interest," concluded Moser, "can be healthy and life-enhancing."
References:
1. Moser, Charles and Peggy J. Kleinplatz, "DSM-IV-TR and the Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal," paper presented at the American Psychiatric Association annual conference, San Francisco, California, May 19, 2003.
2. "Special Section: Pedophilia: Concepts and Controversy," in Archives of Sexual Behavior, vol. 31, No. 6, December 2002, p. 465-510.
Only 10 percent of the population is actually heterosexual, while 80 percent is "mixed" or bi-sexual.
Wal-Mart Hits Teens with Gay Porn How-To Manual
By Gudrun Schultz
BENTONVILLE, AR, November 15, 2006 - A graphic sex-ed manual promoting lesbianism to teenage girls is now offered for sale by Wal-Mart in the United States. Called "irresponsible and obscene" and by the Institute for Canadian Values, the material contains explicit directions for engaging in oral/anal sexual acts. The book encourages same-sex experimentation, telling girls that only 10 percent of the population is actually heterosexual, while 80 percent is "mixed" or bi-sexual.
Produced by St. Stephens' Community House in Toronto, the book titled "The Little Black Book for Girlz: A Book on Healthy Sexuality" caused a storm of controversy earlier this fall when parents and pro-family groups first became aware of the books' content after it was published in September.
The manual was further condemned for using obscene and derogatory language. Examples include a section entitled "My First Time F***ing a Girl" and the statement "If you need someone to represent God The Holiness, then for me, it's a fat black dyke."
The manual contains misleading and dangerous information on "safe" sex devises, assuring teenagers that condom use is 100 percent effective in preventing the transmission of disease. That statement contradicts the World Health Organization's recent admission that condom use fails to protect against HIV/AIDS transmission up to 20 percent of the time, crucial information missing from the manual.
Another section on "safe" lesbian sex acts, entitled "How to use a dental dam," encourages girls to engage in such dangerous behaviour as sewing latex squares used in dentistry into the crotch of their underwear "for added fun."
Wal-Mart says the book, sold for $8.50, is "a great mix of real-life examples and life-saving info."
Advertising the manual as "not just a book about sex, but a look at girl culture by teenagers," the book is praised as "No stuffy school textbook," with "No nosy adults" involved.
"It's all stuff that youth need to know…The Little Black Book for Girlz is an important, take--anywhere empowerment guide. Girls shouldn't leave their teen years without it."
Wal-Mart recently joined the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, which celebrated the involvement of the corporation as "part of the company's ongoing commitment to advancing diversity among all of its associate, supplier and customer bases."
The company contributed $60,000 in 2006 to the activist group Out & Equal, an organization dedicated to promoting the homosexual lifestyle, including same-sex marriage, in the workplace. Wal-Mart ran a full-page ad in the Out & Equal 2006 Workplace Summit Program Guide stating the company's commitment to supporting the goals of the Out & Equal Summit.
In 2005, Human Rights Campaign, the largest homosexual activist lobby organization in the U.S., applauded Wal-Mart for adopting a new definition of family that included same-sex partners, where recognized under state law.
2002 Study Shows The Importance Of Social Factors, Cannot Detect Genetic Factors In SSA
2002 Study Shows The Importance Of Social Factors, Cannot Detect Genetic Factors In SSA
2002 Study Shows The Importance Of Social Factors, Cannot Detect Genetic Factors In SSA By N. E. Whitehead, Ph.D., Lower Hutt, New Zealand August 10, 2006 - A study in the American Journal of Sociology by Columbia/Yale researchers Bearman and Bruekner contradicts a recent study by researcher Bogaert of Canada and declares that at least one social factor is important in the development of male SSA. The study shows that males in opposite-sex twin pairs are twice as likely to have SSA as expected -- which is almost certainly a social effect. Parallel calculations for the extent of a genetic effect on SSA gave a result of zero for both males and females, which is similar to, but lower than, two other recent studies. The study entitled "Opposite-sex twins and adolescent same-sex attraction" appeared in 2002, but has received no media attention, partly because its abstract did not show the interesting details contained in the paper. When contacted by Dr. Warren Throckmorton, the chief author Peter Bearman, said that no other researchers had contacted him about the report. A problem with SSA studies has been that they have been based on volunteers rather than being really representative of the population. In contrast, an excellent sample was used in the Bearman/Bruekner study. The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health) was started in 1994 and surveyed tens of thousands of children who were truly nationally representative. In this survey, 3,139 sibling pairs were specially selected from among this group, including many twin pairs for the genetic part of this study. Although refusal to participate was allowed, 80% agreed, making it probably the highest acceptance rate in any genetic study, and least subject to bias. Included in the study were opposite sex twins, identical twins, fraternal twins, sibling pairs and even adopted pairs. There were generally several hundred individuals in each category. Although the males in opposite twin pairs were twice as likely to develop SSA, statistical examination by Dr. Throckmorton and his colleagues showed that the result was only about as significant as the study by Bogaert in which he claimed development of SSA in adopted males was correlated with number of elder brothers in the original family but not the adopted family. Bearman and Bruecker explained their opposite twin effect by parental influence. They say that demands for unisex equal treatment by opposite-sex twins lead to less masculine influence on the males and greater masculine influence on the females. However, this is far more critical for males and leads to greater SSA. They also did a traditional twin study among their subjects and found the genetic contribution was zero, and chance was a very important factor. In identical male twins, if one twin had SSA there was only a 7% chance the co-twin had SSA, and the corresponding result for females was about 5%. These results, known as the concordance rates, have steadily decreased with time as studies have become more representative, suggesting previous volunteer-related bias. The study joins two previous ones (Bailey, et al. 2000, Hershberger 1997) to give a low genetic contribution for same sex attraction (which might not be exactly the same as sexual orientation). Averaging the three studies, the genetic contributions for male and female SSA are now 10% and 25% respectively. The only literature figure for genetic contribution to OSA (Opposite Sex Attraction) or heterosexuality, is 18% for both sexes combined (Hershberger, 1997). Bearman and Brueckner could find no trace of a fraternal birth order on the males in their opposite-sex twins, although the effect is generally rather well established by other research. Bogaert, contacted by Throckmorton, thinks that the study is a rogue result, mainly a chance finding. He emphasizes it is for unstable adolescents and may not be comparable with studies on adults. However, if this once again points to the instability of SSA in adolescents, it also points to the fact that social factors must play a large part and that adolescents, among others, could seriously consider change of sexual orientation References Bailey, JM; Dunne, MP; Martin, NG (2000): Genetic and Environmental influences on sexual orientation and its correlates in an Australian twin sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 78, 524-536. Bearman, PS; Bruckner, H (2002): Opposite-sex twins and adolescent same-sex attraction. American Journal of Sociology 107, 1179-1205. Hershberger, SL (1997): A twin registry study of male and female sexual orientation. Journal of Sex Research 34, 212-222.
Scotland Forbids Nurses To Use 'Mum' Or 'Dad' In Health Care
Scotland Forbids Nurses To Use
'Mum' Or 'Dad' In Health Care
December 8, 2006 - The Daily Mail of London (Dec. 3, 2006) reported on a new policy booklet from the National Health Service that forbids nurses from using terms such as "Mum," "Dad," "husband," "wife," or "married" under new "anti-homophobia" rules. The report, "Good LGBT Practice In the NHS," tells nurses that they must use terms like "guardian" or "carer" when referring to parents in order not to offend homosexual parents.
The report was produced in collaboration with a gay group known as Stonewall and was funded by the Scottish Executive.
It warns health care workers that they face disciplinary action if they fail to comply. It says, "Resources will be expended on conflict if there is resistance to required change."
The booklet notes: "Many remarks made by people that appear to be harmless or throwaway may assume only opposite-sex relationships are valid. This is demeaning for LGBT people and they may fear a negative reaction if the assumptions are challenged ... LGBT people can and do have children - sexual orientation or gender identity has nothing to do with good parenting or good child care."
http://www.show.scot.nhs.uk/
Psychology Losing Scientific Credibility,
Psychology Losing Scientific Credibility,
Say APA Insiders
At NARTH Conference, APA Past-President
Charges His Association with Stifling Discourse and Distorting Research
By Linda Ames Nicolosi
In a harsh critique of his own profession, a former American Psychological Association president told fellow clinicians at the NARTH Conference that social science is in a state of alarming decline.
Speaking to a rapt audience of about 100 fellow professionals at the Marina Del Rey Marriott Hotel on November 12, 2005, psychologists Nicholas Cummings, Ph.D. and Rogers Wright, Ph.D. had much to say about the profession they had served throughout their long and distinguished careers -- charging "intellectual arrogance and zealotry" within a profession that they say is now dominated by social-activist groups.
Dr. Cummings said he has had a career-long commitment to promoting diversity. Therefore has been dismayed to see activists exploit the stature of the parent body to further their own social aims -- pushing the APA to take positions in areas where they have no conclusive evidence.
When APA does conduct research, Dr. Cummings said, they only do so "when they know what the outcome is going to be...only research with predictably favorable outcomes is permissible."
When writing their newly released book Destructive Trends in Mental Health, Wright and Cummings invited the participation of a number of fellow psychologists who flatly turned them down--fearing loss of tenure, loss of promotion, and other forms of professional retaliation. "We were bombarded by horror stories," Dr. Cummings said. "Their greatest fear was of the gay lobby, which is very strong in the APA."
"'Homophobia as intimidation' is one of the most pervasive techniques used to silence anyone who would disagree with the gay activist agenda," said Cummings. "Sadly, I have seen militant gay men and lesbians-- who I am certain do not represent all homosexuals, and who themselves have been the object of derision and oppression-- once gaining freedom and power, then becoming oppressors themselves."
He described his own experience of oppression and reverse bias: "This was aptly demonstrated," he said, "during an interchange that took place in a large meeting assembled by the then-current president to address the future of the APA. I was just about to agree with one of the participants, when she stopped me before I could speak: 'I don't know what you are going to say, but there is nothing you and I can agree on, because you are a straight white male and I am a lesbian.' Such blatant reverse discrimination was overlooked by everyone else in the room, but I was dumbfounded. This woman is prominent in APA affairs, is extensively published, and has received most of the APA's highest awards. The APA continues to laud her, even though recently she had her license suspended for an improper dual relationship with a female patient! What would be the response had it been a straight white male in an improper dual relationship with a female patient?"
Regarding treatment for unwanted homosexuality, the American Psychological Association has come very close to ratifying a statement which would declare therapy to modify sexual orientation "unethical." But "why does free choice go only one way?" Dr. Cummings asks.
Cummings then discussed a 2004 resolution by the APA in favor of gay marriage, which APA recommended because it "promotes mental health." What was the evidence APA offered? (Such a bold statement from APA, of course, would be used in the courts to decide key social issues.) The references APA cited, it turned out, actually proved only one claim-- that as a general matter, "loving relationships are healthy." "That was one of the worst resolutions," Cummings said.
"When we speak in the name of psychology we are to speak only from facts and clinical expertise," he explained. If psychology speaks out on every social issue, "very soon the public will see us as a discredited organization--just another opinionated voice shouting and shouting."
Cummings' co-author Dr. Rogers Wright (who like Cummings, describes himself as a lifelong liberal) notes that "psychology has been ultra-liberal" and not particularly welcoming to the views of people of religious faith.
Wright described the difficulties he has encountered with the American Psychological Association since the Association instituted a "strategic decision not to respond" to their book in an effort to avoid attracting attention to it. Initially, the APA prohibited its member-publications from reviewing Destructive Trends. "So much for diversity and open-mindedness," Wright added wryly.
Judicial Malfeasance by Activists
Joining them in yet another stinging critique of the mental-health profession was psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover, M.D. In his talk entitled "Judicial Abuse of Scientific Literature on Homosexuality by the American Mental Health Professional Organizations," Satinover offered a long, elaborately referenced description of ethics breaches in the recent legal cases that have set the stage for groundbreaking changes in family-law policy.
Satinover said the mental-health associations had allowed themselves to be used by gay activists who distorted the research findings to serve their own socio-political aims. This distortion of the science, he said, has been so great that it is "appalling beyond imagination."
Dr. Satinover recently taught constitutional law at Princeton University, and is presently doing research at the University of Nice. He showed the legal briefs to his students and told them, "Whether you become a leftist or a rightist, don't hold yourself to such a standard."
Given carte blanche, the activists wrote briefs that were "sophisticated, nuanced" but in many cases, almost entirely untrue. To Dr. Satinover's dismay, the brief-writers' testimony rarely matched the references they footnoted--but almost never directly cited--as corroborating evidence.
Called as an expert witness in court cases and asked to assess briefs being submitted to state and the U.S. Supreme Courts, Satinover had the opportunity to pore over hundreds of research papers offered as evidence by the gay activists who had been invited to represent the views of the major mental-health associations.
He quoted Susan Cochran, Ph.D., a lesbian activist advising the Lawrence v. Texas brief, which claimed that "Research has...found no inherent association between homosexuality and psychopathology." The references she provided were largely self-references -- referring not to corroborating sources, but directly back to her own published work. Paradoxically, in those same studies, Cochran had consistently found more mental-health problems in lesbians and gay men -- and she did not find that "social homophobia" was a sufficient cause for these problems. In fact, Cochran had concluded in one of her own referenced papers that "further research is needed to explore the causal mechanisms underlying this association." In a follow-up paper, she herself showed that the effects of social homophobia couldn't account entirely for the association.
Satinover also offered evidence from the Romer v. Evans brief that evidently came from gay-activist psychologist Gregory Herek, Ph.D., who wrote the brief on behalf of the APA. Herek, he says, distorted the findings of the authors of the research he cited; omitted available contrary evidence; and failed to mention the evidence for spontaneous changes of sexual identity. Herek also defined the term "homosexual" in an arguable manner that worked most effectively to meet the aims of his brief--a definition that was the outcome solely of his own work, and that deviated from widely-used, neutral scientific standards. In support of the argument that same-sex attracted people are as well-adjusted as straights, Satinover said, Herek also referenced the "notoriously flawed and out-of-date Hooker study, its claims long-since and multiple times overturned."
Pedophile Supporters
Offering Family-Law Testimony?
In the Romer v. Evans case, psychologist John Money, Ph.D. was referenced (also by Herek, evidently) as an expert in sexual identity. In an interview published in the Dutch journal of pedophilia (PAIDIKA), Money once said, "If it [man-boy sexual contact] is consensual, it can be constructive."
Another expert offered by Herek was John de Cecco, Ph.D., who has also written affirmatively of man-boy "intergenerational intimacy" in the Journal of Homosexuality, and is an editor of PAIDIKA.
Yet one other frequent contributor to legal testimony, the Lawrence brief included, is lesbian activist-researcher Charlotte Patterson, Ph.D., who in a landmark case of same-sex adoption was cited for refusing to turn over her research notes, contributing to her side's defeat. "Her conduct was a clear violation of a court order," said Satinover, "yet she is still writing briefs in current court cases."
In discussing the overall "scope and type of malfeasance," Satinover concluded the following:
1. "Briefs appear to be authored by a small circle of individuals who are called on repeatedly, with footnoted references that almost never properly substantiate their case."
2. A common tactic is to reference studies "that are trivial or out-of-date, while ignoring more important, recent, larger, better, and superceding research."
3. "A substantial portion of the authorities cited [through footnotes] will be themselves."
4. "The most common pattern is by far the simplest: the overwhelming mountain of contrary evidence is simply never mentioned."
"The malfeasance is relentless," Satinover concluded. "It is appalling beyond imagination."
Other Speakers
During the luncheon, Dr. Dean Byrd offered a rousing address.
"As I reviewed the brief history of NARTH," he said, "it is nothing short of amazing what has been accomplished." To continue this forward momentum, he said, NARTH members should get more involved in the public sphere; work within the national associations, and remember to continually remind those who would silence them, that "diversity includes me."
Dr. Byrd then read from a letter he wrote to the American Psychological Association:
"In your addresses and written messages, you have repeatedly focused on the importance of diversity. Even in the recent Monitor, you noted that APA has demonstrated 'a lack of sensitivity or downright rudeness' toward marginalized groups. While it is not my intent to be offensive, it seems that your response to APA members who are members of NARTH reflects that insensitivity of which you are so critical.
"Client autonomy is central to NARTH's mission. NARTH's official position is that homosexuality is an adaptation. For some men and women, this adaptation is distressful and unsatisfying. NARTH supports an individual's right to either claim a homosexual identity or to pursue change in their adaptation in accordance with the ethical principle of client self-determination.
"Though not all of the patients that NARTH members treat are religious, many are. Is it not a blatant disregard for their religious values and an affront to real diversity to marginalize these individuals by failing to acknowledge their right to choose how they will adapt sexually?
"The focus of NARTH's attention is a 'marginalized group within a marginalized group'--those who feel that homosexual attractions are not who they are and seek help in reconciling their unwanted sexual attractions with their value systems. Would you or APA not find a place at the table for such individuals or would you add to their distress by refusing to acknowledge that they exist? Would you deny the importance of client autonomy and client self-determination?"
"APA's continuous messages of respect for diversity rings hollow if it does not represent different worldviews....either you support client autonomy or you do not; either you support client self-determination or you do not; either your actions reflect diversity, or they do not.
"NARTH members and supporters have impressive publication records in respected journals such as Professional Psychology, Archives of Sexual Behavior, Psychological Reports, Journal of Marriage and Family Therapy and the Journal of Law and Family Studies.
"Listen to one NARTH supporter," he concluded, "and tell me who you think he is. He said: 'I am here as the champion of one's right to choose....It is my fervent belief that freedom of choice should govern one's sexual orientation...If homosexuals choose to transform their sexuality into heterosexuality, that resolve and decision is theirs and theirs alone, and should not be tampered with by any special interest group.' This statement was made by Dr. Robert Perloff -- a former APA President."
Also during the luncheon, attorney Scott Lively noted that NARTH's critics are supported by tens of millions of dollars from foundations on the left, which effectively permits them to "steer the culture through grants." In an effort to begin reversing that trend, he recently created the Pro-Family Endowment, with one of its initial grants being made to NARTH.
On Sunday, Dr. Norman Goldwasser offered an address describing the use of EMDR (Eye Movement Desensitization Reprocessing) therapy to help clients overcome the effects of trauma and to actualize their heterosexual potential. Dr. Goldwasser says he had had considerable success using the technique with same-sex attracted clients.
Also offering an address was Nancy Heche, Ph.D., the mother of actress Anne Heche, a former lesbian. In a warm, inspirational and emotionally stirring speech, Dr. Heche offered support for families who have suffered from the discovery of a loved one's same-sex attractions.
On Friday, Dr. Joseph Nicolosi offers a Men's Track workshop for in-depth training of psychotherapists, while a Women's Track training workshop was offered by Mary Beth Patton, M.A., L.P.C., Janelle Hallman, M.A., L.P.C., and Cynthia Winn, M.A., M.F.T.
Other speeches and roundtable discussions were offered by Alan Chambers of Exodus, Dr. Julie Harren, Dr. Jerry Harris, Dr. Ryan Howes, Konstantin Mascher (from Germany), Dr. Christopher Rosik, attorney Arthur Goldberg, Dr. James Phelan, and Dr. Richard Potts.
Doctorate Degree Awarded for Thesis Defending Pedophilia
Doctorate Degree Awarded for Thesis Defending Pedophilia
Doctorate Degree Awarded for Thesis Defending Pedophilia
LONDON, December 3, 2004 - Richard Yuill, awarded a doctorate degree from Glasgow University this week, argued in his doctoral thesis that sex between children and adults is sometimes a positive experience for the children.
The assumption has been challenged by sex abuse experts, who say the work could add fuel to the arguments of pedophiles who say that their abusive acts are consensual, and that they are not harming anyone.
"The conclusions are that in such relationships I think you've got the good, the bad and the ugly, and that's where I stand on that," Yuill said, as reported by the UK's ultra-liberal newspaper, The Guardian.
"Whatever his intention, one of the things we know about sexual offenders is that they seize on this kind of thing and use it to support their position," said Warwick University senior lecturer in social work, Chris Harrison.
Yuill, who referred to himself as a "boylover" in his interviews with pedophiles, says his work could challenge the UK law that prohibits sexual relations between adults and children under 16 years of age. Sex abuse experts and those who created the law say children are incapable of offering consent to sexual relations with an adult.
"The only thing I'm reporting is that the research findings do not concur with that overall picture," Yuill said. "A number of respondents would concur with the law ... but others found positive experiences or at least what I'd call neutral."
Glasgow University defended its decision to award the thesis. It argued that there was nothing criminal in Yuill's views.
Read Guardian coverage: http://www.guardian.co.uk/child/story/0,7369,1364313,00.html
Normalizing Pedophilia Continues: UK Police Chief Says 13-Year-Old in Porn Not Child Porn
By John-Henry Westen
LONDON, November 20, 2006 - Terry Grange, the leading officer on child protection of the UK's Association of Chief Police Officers' has ignited controversy by commenting in an interview with The Sunday Times that pornography featuring children at 13 years of age should not be considered child porn. Grange also said that the term "pedophiles" should only apply to adults who have sex with 12 and under.
Grange's comments match those of the pedophilia party launched recently, with court approval, in the Netherlands. The 'Charity, Freedom and Diversity' (NVD) party of the Netherlands formed last Spring introduced itself to Dutch politics as a champion of children's rights. In a press release, the NVD's spokesman and co-founder, Ad van den Berg said among their goals is lowering the age of consent for sexual activity from 16 to 12 and eventually eliminating it completely.
Grange told the Sunday Times: "Child porn is 12 and under." On pedophilia he said: "For me, that sort of thing, paedophilia, is [with] prepubescent children."
In the UK where the age of consent for sexual activity is 16, Grange says, "It is much more of an issue for me if a child is under 13. I think the closer they get to 16 the more it becomes a grey area and I think everyone in the field of dealing with sexual health and sexual activity acknowledges that."
He added: "I don't actually personally adhere to the 15-year-old being with a 20-year-old boyfriend being paedophilia, or even if the boyfriend is 30."
The ACPO incident is the latest in the ongoing normalization of pedophilia, which has picked up steam since homosexual 'marriage' has been mainstreamed.
In comments this weekend, Romeo and Juliet director Franco Zeffirelli made positive remarks about homosexual sexual contact with young boys. In the context of noting that as a boy he was sexually abused by a priest, Zeffirelli said, "(Homosexual experiences) are not always bad for boys. I don't think they make you homosexual. Sexual choice is made for you early on in life anyway - if you like girls, you like girls."
LifeSiteNews.com reported in June on a poll which found 11% of Canadians did not consider pedophilia immoral.
In 2001, leading Canadian film-makers were promoting the pedophiliac film Fat Girl which featured nude scenes with a thirteen year old. And in 2004 Nicole Kidman starred in the movie Birth which included a scene which made it appear as if she bathed in the nude with a boy of 10 with whom she was sexually interested.
Also in 2004, Glasgow University awarded a student a doctoral degree for his thesis defending pedophilia.
-->
The truth about 'gay' pedophilia
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52330
http://tinyurl.com/n6tcp
Posted: October 7, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Olivia St. John
Liberals are experts at framing debates in their favor. Since the Foley fiasco hit the news, the emphasis has been on evils lurking within the Republican Party.
Incredibly, political editor Brian E. Crowley of the Palm Beach Post opined, "Rumors that Foley is gay have swirled around him for years. … But on Friday, whether Foley was a homosexual or a heterosexual no longer seemed to matter."
Really? Why would that be considered inconsequential? Could it be because the Democrat Party embraces legalizing homosexual marriage and inserting homosexual material into public school textbooks designed for children as young as grammar school, as demonstrated in recent efforts by the California Legislature to indoctrinate students? That is the real story behind this media blitz that Democrats want Americans to miss.
While the leftist media focuses on the political ramifications surrounding Foley in an effort to gain points for liberal candidates in the upcoming election, the fact that a homosexual rather than a heterosexual preyed on a young male is being oddly overlooked. Few people are talking about it. And the question is "Why not?" The answer is important because to ignore it is to dismiss the real plight of many homosexuals today and their impact upon our culture, our children and our political scene.
Foley admits that he is a homosexual. Dare the question be asked whether homosexuals commit higher rates of molestation than heterosexuals do? Or are the thought police hard at work silencing the possible implications?
English professor Karla Jay, Ph.D., and well-educated journalist Allen Young, both homosexual activists, conducted the first major survey on homosexuality in America in 1979. Their work is still cited in academic studies and involved over 5,000 homosexuals from all walks of life. Titled "The Gay Report," the study published data on underage sex, disease, gross promiscuity, suicidal tendencies and more.
One cannot help but applaud the honesty of these two homosexuals in publishing the results of their study, which documented that "23 percent of respondents admitted to having had sex with youths aged 13-15, while 19 percent felt positive about sexual activity within this age group." Tragically, 50 percent of the males in their survey experienced their first sexual encounter at age 15 or less.
In spite of the fact that two gay researchers produced "The Gay Report," radical homosexual activists dismiss it as outdated. This is ironic considering they so often cite the much older 1948 "10 percent of society is gay" statistic from the oft-disputed Alfred Kinsey study.
But out of courtesy for their concerns, are there other esteemed elites drawing the same conclusions? Contrary to the homosexual assertion that heterosexual molestations outnumber those committed by homosexuals, Yale and Harvard-connected psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover states that "careful studies show that pedophilia is far more common among homosexuals than heterosexuals." Satinover adds, "The greater absolute number of heterosexual cases reflects the fact that heterosexual males outnumber homosexual males by approximately 36 to 1. Heterosexual child molestation cases outnumber homosexual cases by only 11 to 1, implying that pedophilia is more than three times more common among homosexuals."
So considering the fact that this type of sexual interest is shown by studies to occur more often in homosexual populations, is it any surprise that Mark Foley admitted he himself was molested as a teenager by a clergyman?
According to a report by Gregory Rogers featured on the website for the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, such issues raise "immediate questions … should gay priests be allowed access to Sunday Schools or youth groups?" Instead of asking that question, however, the liberal cohorts shift the spotlight off the homosexuals themselves and onto the church as a whole, just as they're now doing with the Republicans even though they themselves have a stained record in this regard.
While pointing their fingers at Republicans, who may have overlooked gross evil while focusing on political gain, liberals overlook a tremendous evil themselves by ignoring the truth about homosexual behavior. They fail to speak out for the innocent children caught in the path of a rabid homosexual agenda fueled by wounded people who refuse to change.
As David Kupelian states in his groundbreaking best seller "The Marketing of Evil," "The end game is not only to bring about the complete acceptance of homosexuality, including same-sex marriage, but also to prohibit and even criminalize public criticism of homosexuality."
And all of this at the expense of our children.
Kako je homoseksualnost ukinuta 1973. god. Intervju Dr Nicholas Cummings bivsi predsednik Americkog psihijatrijskog drustva
Pre nego sto bila sta kazem o Dr. Nicholasu Cummingsu preporucujem da prvo skinete njegov intervju sa ovog sajta:
http://drhelen.blogspot.com/2006_03_12_drhelen_archive.html
Deo koji se odnosi na intervju nosi naziv:
Podcast on the APA, "Destructive Trends in Mental Health and Politics"
To je i ujedno naziv knjige koja je potresla Ameriku. Velicina intervjua iznosi oko 17,8 mb, i preporucujem da ga skinete sa opcije za ipod, a za one koji imaju dilup takodje postoji opcija za skidanje
Who Is Dr. Nicholas Cummings?
Former APA President, Nicholas A. Cummings, PhD, is a member of the legendary "Dirty Dozen," a group of practitioners that fought for professionalism, licensure and third-party reimbursement. He implemented the first comprehensive psychotherapy insurance and pushed for the freedom of choice legislation that led to third party reimbursement of psychologists. Cummings founded the National Council of Schools of Professional Psychology and the National Academies of Practice-- two institutions that shaped the professional school movement and the psychologist as behavioral primary-care physician.
Dr. Cummings started the first practitioner-managed behavioral health delivery system in the United States. American Biodyne was innovative, successful, and ahead of its time. He is recognized as the foremost expert on the delivery of mental health care. Nick Cummings is a life long advocate for professional psychology and practice
Dr. Cummings is president of the Foundation for Behavioral Health, and chair of the boards of The Nicholas and Dorothy Cummings Foundation and the University Alliance for Behavioral Care Inc. Dr. Cummings was born in Salinas, California and earned his PhD in clinical psychology from Adelphi University. Presently, Dr. Cummings is on the Board of Directors of The National Alliance of Professional Psychology Providers.
E sada zasto sam prvo dao intervju pa onda njegovu biografiju. Ako ukucate njegovo ime u google naicicete na podatke o njemu kao coveku koji je najzasluzniji zasto se 1973 godine homoseksualizam ukida kao bolest od strane APA (Americke psihijatrijske asocijacije). Slusajuci njegov intervju mozete doci do zakljucka da covek ne pripada konzervativcima ni tradicionalistima, vec kako sam kaze pripada liberalima.U intervju iznosi na koji nacin je ukinuta odluka iz 1973 godine, ali govori i o tome sta se danas desava u APA i drugim slicnim organizacijama koji trpe ogroman uticaj od strane raznih homoseksualnih pokreta, a narocito politicara. Govori o tome kako psihijatrija i psihologija dozivljavaju krizu jer su postali opasan instrument u rukama mocnika. Najbolje da sami cujete. Verujte mi ni malo nije dosadno.
Takodje, ko ima priliku da nabavi knjigu preporucujem mu da je procita.
Is Psychology Losing Its Way?
By Dr. Warren Throckmorton
December 21, 2005
A recent book edited by eminent psychologists Rogers Wright and Nicholas Cummings delivers a stunning indictment of the mental health professions. Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The Well-Intentioned Path to Harm documents and critiques the ascent of social activism over open-minded scientific inquiry and quality mental health care in the current mental health establishment. This book is a must-read for anyone who cares about mental health care in this country.
The book casts a critical eye on muchof the social activism of the psychological and psychiatric professional associations over the past thirty years. However, Drs. Wright and Cummings cannot be dismissed as disgruntled conservatives. Their deeds validate their claim to be “lifelong liberal activists.” For instance, while president of the American Psychological Association, Dr. Cummings supported the development of the first task force championing the mental health needs of gays, lesbians and bisexuals.
In addition tobeingpersonally involved in social activism, the authors have been keen and pragmatic observers of the mental health professions over the past 40 years. My own contact with Nick Cummings made a lasting impact on me. I first met Dr. Cummingsin 1986 when American Biodyne, the first real managed behavioral health care company in America, came to Ohio as a manager of the state employee behavioral health care program. I just started my counseling private practice in Portsmouth, Ohio, and wanted to get on board the managed care train. Biodyne did something very novel for a managed care company: all therapists in the preferred network were required to be trained by the company leaders, including the president and founder, Nick Cummings. In all my years of education, both in school and post-grad, I have never listened to a better trainer than Nick Cummings. He believed mental health therapy could be a powerful influence in a person's life but it was never to be used to gratify the therapist or to promote a political agenda. That same theme permeates this book. Drs. Cummings and Wright believe that modern psychology has been overthrown by forces of social activism and as a consequence faces irrelevance.
As one example, Cummings and Wright demonstrate how political support for gay activism has led to stifling of client self-determination. Consider this quote from the book regarding sexual identity therapy:
"In the current climate, it is inevitable that conflict arises among the various subgroups in the marketplace. For example, gay groups within the APA [American Psychological Association] have repeatedly tried to persuade the association to adopt ethical standards that prohibit therapists from offering psychotherapeutic services designed to ameliorate "gayness" on the basis that such efforts are unsuccessful and harmful to the consumer. Psychologists who do not agree are termed homophobic. Such efforts are especially troubling because they abrogate the patient's right tochoose the therapistand determine therapeutic goals. They also deny the reality of data demonstrating that psychotherapy can be effective in changing sexual preferences in patients who have a desire to do so." (From the introduction, page xxx).
Sexual identity therapy is not the only political hot potato tackled by theauthors. They demonstrate how politically correct posturing can serve to obscure research findings. For instance, co-editor Wright cites research by Cummings suggesting that positive male figures in the lives of children are significantly related to a decrease in the number of children requiring medication for behavior problems. However, he laments that such research results are frequently stifled or even dismissed because they offend feminist sensibilities.
Drs. Wright and Cummings express concern over the professional consequences of psychology’s misadventures into social activism. They paint a picture of psychologists being unable to support themselves as psychologists because the profession has become enamored with producing position statements about social change. Mental health care in America is adequate but barely so. Any practicing counselorknows how difficult it is to find quality services anywhere outside of the metropolitan areas of this country. Cummings and Wright predict that psychology’s preoccupation with social activism threatens to make it irrelevant as a force for quality and affordable health care for all people.
So how is the current leadership of the APA reacting to the critique of Cummings and Wright? Not well. It appears the former APA luminaries are getting a cold shoulder from the current leadership. At a recent meeting of National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, Dr. Wright noted that the APA adopted a "strategic decision not to respond" to their book to avoid giving it undue attention. Furthermore, the APA initially prohibited its member-publications from even reviewing the book. Observed Dr. Wright: "So much for diversity and open-mindedness."
In my opinion, the current APA leadership will ignore these warnings at their peril. When it comes to trends in mental health care, Nick Cummings has rarely been wrong in his predictions. I don't think he is wrong this time.
Warren Throckmorton, PhD is an Associate Professor of Psychology and Fellow for Psychology and Public Policy in The Center for Vision and Values at Grove City (PA) College. Dr. Throckmorton is past-president of the American Mental Health Counselors Association and is the producer of the documentary, I Do Exist about sexual identity formation. His columns have been published by over 80 newspapers nationwide and can be contacted through his website at www.drthrockmorton.com.