Efforts to End Reparative Therapy being Debated

Diane Robertson

Last week, three House Democrats introduced a resolution to get states to end psychiatric help for children with unwanted same sex attraction. The “Stop Harming Our Kids Resolution,” H.Con.Res. 141, is a resolution that describes efforts to change the sexual orientation of minors as harmful, and states that it should be prohibited.

This Congressional Resolution is strikingly similar to a California Bill that Governor Jerry Brown signed into law which will ban reparative therapy for same sex attraction for use with minors, January 2013. The Congressional Resolution also states that “being lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or gender nonconforming is not a disorder, disease, illness, deficiency, or shortcoming.”

Going along with the Congressional Resolution, the APA (American Psychological Association) just revised its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders to no longer listbeing transgender as a mental disorder. When asked about the change, APA member Jack Drescher explained that “All psychiatric diagnoses occur within a cultural context. We know there is a whole community of people out there who are not seeking medical attention and live between the two binary categories. We wanted to send the message that the therapist’s job isn’t to pathologize.”

However, a federal judge has temporarily barred California from enforcing its ban on reparative therapy for the three psychiatrists who have sued to overturn the law. The plaintiffs, psychiatrist Anthony Duk, marriage and family therapist Donald Welch, and Aaron Bitzer, who underwent reparative therapy himself, argue that the law violates their constitutional right to free speech.

U.S. District Court Judge William Shubb agreed to block enforcement of the law for the plaintiffs until a trial can be held.  Other therapists in California will be required to obey the law. The judge said in his injunction that he expects the trio will prevail in getting the law struck down on constitutional grounds.

 

 

 

Acceptance of Diversity or All-out Indoctrination?

Rachel Allison

Just over eighteen months ago a friend of mine heard about a program being presented at a high school across town.  It was advertised as a  Pinal County LGBTQ Youth Summit.  (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer) Recognizing that such a program could prove provocative, we decided to sit in on the event.

There were several teachers, and adult presenters, but my friend and I were the only parents in attendance. There were probably forty students who attended the mini conference.   All were asked to sign in with name and contact information.

Among other pro-gay groups, “One in Ten” Leadership was at this summit to promote safety and acceptance of those who are in the above category.  They claim that eighty percent of their work is helping schools, counselors, and administrations create safe schools for transgendered youth. But they also admit that their camps promote ways to empower youth who think they are or may be LGBTQ.

An openly gay young man conducted the program.  But before the meeting even started he had worked the crowd and had won us all over with his charisma and charm.  He talked to all of us for just a few minutes about the support his team was there to offer, and then a video clip from ABC news was shown that depicted the fatal effects that bullying had on a heterosexual young man. I hate bullying, and this film portrayed its cruelty.  Of course our hearts went out to the young man in the video…but we were a bit confused by the presentation of heterosexual bullying when the presentation was supposed to be about gay/lesbian/transgender/bisexual abuse.  We didn’t know if there were documented cases of gay bullying or not, but they didn’t discuss it if there were.

At this point in the presentation it was announced that all the adults were supposed to go to one classroom, and all the youth were to go to another classroom.  This did not sit well with either my friend or me, but we recognized ourselves as “outsiders” in this group so we followed orders.  We were “taught” that there is a difference between sex and gender.  We were told that expanding our understanding to include a gender spectrum may be challenging, uncomfortable and even painful…that it requires bucking a lifetime of training, socialization, assumptions and practice, and that it would challenge our moral, religious and cultural traditions…..  Well, their philosophy certainly does all that!  I tuned in and out of the dialogue, as I was more concerned about what was being taught to the vulnerable youth in the next classroom.

All of these memories came flooding back as I read the article posted on World Family News,  “Gorham Middle School Officials Apologize for Diversity Day Discussion.” According to the article Gorham Middle School recently hosted representatives of a group called PRYSM, Proud Rainbow Youth of Southern Maine, to talk about gender diversity and discrimination.  When it was learned that homosexual foreplay was discussed, the Principal knew a major apology was in order.

After reading the article, it would not surprise me if the very group that came to our city and state taught inappropriate dialogue to the youth who were alone in their classroom.   I wonder if adults were actually present at Gorham Middle School.  Perhaps the youth and adults were separated just like the presentation in Arizona that I attended.

Parents, please tune in to all that your children are being exposed to.  There are elements of society who would love nothing more than to indoctrinate the lonely, vulnerable and confused.  (Having had five teenagers I witnessed the lonely, vulnerable and confused moments of their pre-adult years OFTEN.)  If your child insists on attending diversity presentations offered at school, accompany him.  And whatever else happens, do NOT let him/her go into a room with Gay agenda promoters, unless accompanied by you or an adult that you trust COMPLETELY.

Reader Poll: “Would you use a dressing room that was open to transgender individuals?”

Here’s the questions we asked readers:     

“Would you use a dressing room that was open to transgender individuals?”

Here’s how readers responded:

  1 Percent                    Yes” (answer by female)

63 Percent                   “No” (answer by female)                                          

  1 Percent                   “Yes” (answer by male)          

35 Percent                   “No” (answer by male)

 

This question is a result of the story about a Macy’s Department store employee who was fired for refusing to let a transgender woman use a women’s dressing room.  The young woman stated that she was fired for attempting to protect female customers and for standing by her religious convictions.  We think that the strongest argument is one of protection for customers.

Thus, we thought we’d ask how many of our readers would feel comfortable they’d feel with the situation.  You can see from the above results that very few would welcome having someone of the opposite sex in their dressing rooms.  Can’t say as we’re surprised.

In an update to this story, a second Macy’s employee has spoken out about the problems she has encountered with men in women’s changing rooms.  Seems this is an ongoing problem at the large department store.

Day Five: Strategies of Resistance – stop the Religious Fundamentalists

Last year at the UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), religion in general was public enemy number one.  This year the feminists have refined and re-framed their argument to unabashedly make “Religious Fundamentalism” their target.  What is their definition of a religious fundamentalist?

Although it was never actually defined, they made it clear that anyone who opposed women’s rights (meaning abortion, sexual rights or GLBTQI rights) is a fundamentalist?  Anyone that believes in the traditional or the “hetero-normative” family is a religious fundamentalist.  Anyone that saw the role of motherhood in a positive light is probably a religious fundamentalist – or at the very least oppressed by religious fundamentalists.  They had everyone from a jihadist to anyone that believed in and support traditional gender roles as being part of the Religious Fundamentalist movement.

By the way, GLBTQI is widely touted at the UN.  Gay rights activists continue to add more letters to their little acronym:  Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgendered, Questioning, or Intersex – the list of sexual orientations just continues to grow.

The gathering for the presentation of “Religious Fundamentalism:  Strategies of Resistance” was a diverse group: a woman from Iran, a woman from Mexico, and an age 20-something young lesbian woman from the U.S who referred to herself as a “queer activist with scriptural underpinnings.”

Here are a few of their quotes about religious fundamentalists.  As you read them, remember that they would probably think that YOU are one.

Woman from Iran

• Religion is about absolutism and intolerance
• Women’s rights are the primary target of religious fundamentalists.
• They want to promote their worldview and gain power; they’re very organized and effective.
• Evangelicals, Catholics, and Mormons combine to prevent abortion and sexual rights.
• They stand for narrow and rigid gender roles.  They want to force the world to abide by their beliefs.

Woman from Mexico

• Opening statement:   “I’m here to tell you everything that you wanted to know about the Vatican, but were afraid to ask.”  [She mocked and degraded the Catholic Church throughout her remarks.]
• Religious Fundamentalists want to force the world to abide by their morals and they are entering mainstream politics and forming alliances.  [They even said this with a straight face after telling those gathered that they had to get involved in politics and form alliances to stop religious fundamentalists.]
• They want to co-opt governments to force their agenda on everyone else.
• Religious Fundamentalists blame social problems on “the disintegration of family” – they take advantage of it to blame the problems on women and the change in women’s roles.

Here was our personal favorite.  In admonishing the individuals in the room to get involved and stop religious fundamentalists in their tracks, she said:  “Use reason and science; it is on our side.  God is on our side.  God wants us to be happy and sexual pleasure is very important.” [So much for telling those assembled that references to religion and God were out-of-bounds for public discourse.]

Lesbian or “Queer Activist”

• Religion is in the air, in our schools, in our public square.
• Bible cannot be understood without a “feminist” lens.  It is not about Bible passages; it’s about power and control.
• The story of Sodom and Gomorrah isn’t about the Bible saying gays are evil; it’s about misogyny, the hatred of women.  Rape, violence, and abuse of women are the basis of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.
• There is also a lot of misogyny on campuses that we visit [Christian-sponsored colleges] – oppression of gays and oppression of women go hand-in-hand.

The conclusion of the UFI team in attendance at this side event:

These women are desperate to have their ideology succeed and are shocked and dismayed that religion has a voice in the public square as well – so they want to silence that voice.  There is no recognition that religion is equally entitled to be engaged in the dialogue.

All who hold traditional, religious, hetero-normative values and beliefs need to not be cowed or intimidated by their rhetoric of “religious fundamentalist.”  Get out and get involved!  You must be making a difference or these national and international groups wouldn’t be getting together to develop strategies to stop you.

A “Man” playing on a Women’s Sports Team

George Washington University last week announced that Kye Allums (formerly Kay-Kay Allums) will be allowed to continue to play on the Women’s Basketball Team.  During her sophomore year, Allums began identifying as a male, but “is still biologically a female, and so will be able to continue playing on the women’s team—and to hold on to his scholarship.”  We quoted part of that last statement directly from the Huffington Post because we couldn’t figure out how to write all the delicate “he/she” references!

So let’s review:  Allums is a female who insists that she is a male and yet wants to continue to play on the women’s basketball team.  A “transgendered male” is evidently in the process of obtaining hormone treatments and gender reassignment surgery and the George Washington University administration is patting themselves on the back for being so tolerant and inclusive.

So what about equity?  Looking at the differences in physical size and strength between males and females, is it fair to have females playing on a male team or males playing on a female sports team?  Throughout sports history, the answer to that question has been an unqualified “No” and there have been numerous policies and procedures put in place to prevent that type of inequity from occurring.  But it appears we may be entering “a brave new world.”

If you read through “On the Team:  Equal Opportunity for Transgendered Student Athletes,” you will read a rousing defense of transgendered individuals on sports teams with the “equity” question addressed like this:

“A growing number of transgendered youth are undergoing medically guided hormonal treatment prior to puberty, thus effectively neutralizing this problem [unfair advantage due to growth in long bones, muscle mass and strength that is triggered by testosterone].  Transgendered girls [males] who transition in this way to not go through a male puberty.”

“There is a great deal of natural variation in physical size and ability among non-transgendered girls and boys [don’t buy into stereotypes on physical ability and stature and the difference in sexes].”

Here’s our predication:  You will have few, if any, transgendered males (females turned male) lining up to be on male sports teams.  Individuals who claim the title of “transgendered” might lie to themselves and mutilate their bodies in a futile attempt to be something that every cell of their body screams they are not.  But in the case of physical prowess in sports, biology simply won’t allow them that type of deceit.

This is a fictive world that these individuals, as well as those who pander to this type of tragic psychosis, live in.   And if things continue this direction, we all may be forced to participate in their charade.

To see more articles on the topic of Transgendered or Intersex, go here.