BBC Blog Network

User Profile

fishy_psycho

Listed below are comments made by fishy_psycho between Monday, 16th June 2008 and Saturday, 20th December 2008.

«Newer
Older»

Gandalf takes on classroom homophobia 8:33pm on 20 Dec 2008 Information on all perspectives and possible lifestyle choices should be fairly and non judgementally delivered in schools. Young people, whether identifying only to self or to others as homosexual must not get the message in school that their personal sexuality is wrong or simply a matter of choice or that the gay lifestyle is inevitably one of promiscuity. In a pluralistic society young people should be taught that stable gay partnerships are achievable and are acceptable,
especially with the advent of civil partnership legislation. Young people should also be taught, whether in sex or religious education or both, that while orthodox religious teaching is that homosexual behaviour as lived out in gay relationships is contrary to God's plan that some religious people believe that it is acceptable to live as Gay religious people. But they must also be taught to respect the authenticity of a religious identity and that it is a perfectly valid option, for perhaps a minority for whom their religious convictions will not permit them to live out their homosexual identity as LGB, to live a celibate life and that some do so successfully – as successfully as some live in stable gay partnerships. And that some, who may be latently bisexual, choose to live in a heterosexual marriage and control their homosexual attraction because of their religious convictions. This might look something like this.....

Your Sexual Orientation (SO) is OK. Sexual Orientation is not a choice, it just is...... but there is
choice around it.
Your Religious belief is OK. You have a right to your religious beliefs as long as they are important to you.
SO and religious beliefs can clash. This can be painful. When this happens there are options. You can work out which is right for you: here are some options......

1)Accept your SO and practise same sex relationships. LGB organisations support this choice.
2)Accept your SO and seek a monogamous committed same sex relationship. There are religious LGB organisations and some churches which support this choice.
3)Accept your SO and choose to be celibate. There are religious organisations and churches which support this choice.
4)Live as celibate and hope for eventual orientation change (a long term process with uncertain outcome which may be easier if you are bisexual.) There are religious organisations and churches which support this choice.

Whatever you choose to do there are supports available.

Such an approach might help to take some of the controversy out of education on Homosexuality. The polemic only serves to exacerbate homophobic attitudes in schools and society. The Department of Education Guidance (2000) to Schools in England and Wales was that schools should be free to teach about Sex and relationships in a manner appropriate to their religious ethos.
This would seem to be supported by the recent ruling by Mr Justice Weatherup (2007) on the new Sexual Orientation regulations in Northern Ireland. Regarding the regulation relating to the responsible bodies in charge of specified education establishments he stated that “the discrimination provisions under (the) regulation concern first of all access by a pupil to an establishment and secondly, for those who are pupils, access the benefits (which includes facilities and services) of the establishment and the absence of detriment. ........I am satisfied that articulating the orthodox religious view on homosexuality in the classroom does not relate to access, a benefit or a detriment under (the) regulation.” It seems that Faith based schools in NI will not be constrained by the recent sexual orientation regulations to teach only one view about the expression
of homosexuality and homosexual behaviour.
Psychologists reject Iris Robinson's claims 10:29pm on 16 Jun 2008 Approximately 25 years ago, against a background of some of the very crude and humanly degrading “treatments” that had been in vogue for homosexuality, the American Psychiatric Association decided that homosexuality was not a disorder and, therefore, not anything that should be treated or attempted to be treated . These “treatments” were almost invariably a failure in terms of changing an individuals same sex attraction. This contributed to the thinking that it could not be treated and concurrently the political agenda led to the conclusion that, as it was not a disorder, it should not be treated. One effect of this was to effectively end any attempts at research on “treatment” of what had previously been a “disorder”. If that had happened for, e.g. other psychiatric disorders (the sufferers of which often also make hugely positive contributions to society) and research had ended into those conditions, we would still be using the crude treatments that were only available 25 years ago. Thankfully other more sophisticated and humane treatments, both biological and psychological have, as a result of research, been developed for these conditions.
It is just possible that if research into treatment of same sex attraction had been permitted and clinicians had been free to explore other possible treatments then other treatments might now be available with better success rates than the unsophisticated treatments of 25 years ago or with even better success rates than the treatments that are currently attempted. Such “treatments” for homosexuality as do exist have had to be explored in a climate hostile to research, without the chance for open debate amongst therapists because of the politically correct climate.
By and large, same sex attraction does tend to persist over the lifespan. It can however be managed, albeit with difficulty, by those who choose for religious reasons to do so, without embracing the gay lifestyle, when religious communities are understanding and supportive . A few who want, for religious reasons, to seek change in SSA do achieve varying degrees of change in about 33% of cases although even these are always likely to be vulnerable to SSA. Professionals who do this work should not be pilloried. They are offering choice to some whose religious identity and conviction is so strong it will not allow them to live as gay. It is much too simple to put all their distress about their SSA down to internalised homonegativity. Religious identity and theological convictions are not easily changed. It is a human right for this very small minority that they should be able to pursue a treatment as long as they are given full information on the (present day)very modest success rate and the risk (and possible emotional consequences) of disappointment if success is not achieved. After all consent should be fully informed on any treatment.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

fishy_psycho