Holding therapy for homosexuality

Post Reply New Topic

I saw a link on youtube regarding holding therapy for homosexuality:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJXWFZz0 ... re=related
they propose that one man should hold the other man for a long time, and it should cure the homosexuality of the latter.

Anyway, I have two questions: one directed to the people who support the cure for homosexuality and the other to the people who oppose it:

1) IF YOU SUPPORT A CURE FOR HOMOSEXUALITY, didn't it ever occured to you that by having one man holding the other one you only ENCOURAGE him to be gay, which is just the opposite to the goal of the treatment? I know it is "supposed" to be non-sexual, but if the man is gay it might feel sexual to him, even though it is supposed not to. I mean, men process things differently than women. Yes women do have non-sexual hugs with each other, but I never seen men doing that. Why not? Because for a man anything of this nature feels sexual. Besides, even if somehow this doesn't feel sexual to the patient, why encourage a behavior that doesn't fit the social norm of the straight society? After all, the whole purpose of the therapy is to make the client look straight; teaching him to hug other men only makes him look even more gay.

2) IF YOU OPPOSE THE CURE FOR HOMOSEXUALITY, you are likely thinking that such cures damage the patients. Now, why would holding therapy be damaging? If you watch the video, a patient described feeling "very safe" while he was undergoing holding therapy and he said he enjoyed it. So why do you still believe it damages them? I understand that anti-gay people belive that gay touch is damaging even if it is enjoyed. But, since you oppose cure for homosexuality, I presume you are pro-gay. So, as someone pro-gay, why do you think holding therapy would do any damage? If anything, it only shows love. Even though it is done for the wrong reason, still love is a good thing.

I don't think gay people need to be "cured". I think they need to be treated as fully human like the rest of us *shrug*.

~Kate

I am in complete opposition.

Holding therapy is perhaps the most superstitious and anti-scientific thing I have ever heard of.

What's to be cured?

That would be like someone trying to cure me as a female from being attracted to guys. Sexuality is something that is hard wired in all of us. In my opinion it's society that needs to be cured not the individual.

But to be fair, I'm all for the option of a therapist if it is that said homosexual's choice. It would be just as it is with psychics getting paid to read their customers fortunes or deluding them into believing they're connecting them with their loved ones who have passed on.

I don't see a reason for a cure, and I oppose it on the grounds that I imagine it to be pseudoscientific(many such treatments are considered such) and against the interests of these individuals. Now, this doesn't mean that some individuals may want it, but my opposition is pretty general as I can't say that it is wrong for an individual to seek this, so much as just generally say that I don't think it is a good idea.

With regards to homosexuality, there is nothing to cure or have therapy for.

I support a cure for conservative Christianity instead, I mean, as long as it is against their personal interest, then go for it!

I support making a cure available to those that want it, but holding therapy sounds like a load of crap.

It sounds like that's based on the theory that gay men are gay because they didn't properly bond with their fathers (and other males), so therefore they end up wanting to have sex with males. -- Makes perfect sense, right?! It's the basic problem of non-falsifiability in psychology -- you can come up an infinite number of explanations for things that are are instincts and have no real explanation beyond that. I think it's a miracle that that, and things like Tourette's and OCD have escaped being chalked up to psychological causes forever.

And maybe its not bad analogy to the situation with autism. Someone comes up with a "cure" -- but the catch is they didn't really understand what autism is, in lieu of their own weird, incorrect ideas, which makes one wonder what on Earth is their cure is and what it's going to do to someone.

If people want a cure, I suppose they have a right to it, but maybe there should be some oversight that it's not some horrible Frankenstein-ian or quack thing will fail or harm and in then end only serve to magnify a person's self-loathing. For every incurable condition there's a 1000 quack remedies to "cure" it.

See, I'd be totally into being held by some hot man. And it's not like I haven't had my fair share of unrequited crushes.

So, I am totally opposed to "cures" and "therapy" and totally in favour of cuddle time with a man.

I don't give a damn if it is "politically correct" or not. I still say that homosexuality is a mental disorder. I don't know if it can be "cured" but that doesn't mean that it should be condoned or encouraged either.

What if I can't help lusting after 10 year old boys? What if I like to do it to sheep or corpses?
What if I really get my kicks raping women and then chopping them into little bits and eating their hearts?
What if I get my rocks off being tied up and beaten with a whip or doing that to someone else?

Oh dear! By saying that I have just committed a "hate crime" which would get me jailed in Canada.

@ John Browning - if you want a cure available, you will need to instigate a massive selective breeding program, as male homosexuality is almost without doubt a genetic trait.
In the case of women there is research to suggest that it may be much more multi-factorial, even to the point in some cases that they can choose to be homosexual (this of course is vehemently disputed by those women who have always felt desire for other women and are left cold by the thought of a man)

But more to the point the only reason a homosexual person would want a cure is due to the pressures to conform to a bigoted society. The real 'cure' does not involve turning gay folk straight, rather it is one of 'curing' the idiocy that is homophobia. Why would someone who feels 'natural' in the arms of a same sex lover ever want a cure, if not because society has made them feel like they are dirty and sinful?