XPost: alt.psychology, sci.psychology.theory, alt.psychology.jung   
   From: mlwi@swipnet.se   
      
   Dr. Robert L. Spitzer, a prominent retired psychiatrist, now says that   
   his results in reparative therapy of homosexuals weren't reliable,   
   which has been in the headlines lately. But what about all the other   
   research that has been done on conversion therapy of young   
   homosexuals? Nicolosi, Byrd & Potts, 'Retrospective Self-Reports of   
   Changes in Homosexual Orientation' (1997) present a research with 882   
   patients. The conversion success was 33%. Masters & Johnson,   
   Homosexuality in Perspective (1979), account for a research (with   
   follow-up) in which 67 persons partook. The success rate was at least   
   43.2%. Mayerson & Lief (Psychoterapy of Homosexuals. In Marmor, J.   
   (ed.), Sexual Inversion, p.302 (1965)) account for a study in which 19   
   exclusive homosexuals were converted to exclusive heterosexuality. In   
   a follow-up approximately 4.5 years later, 22% remained in an   
   heterosexual relationship. Irving Bieber et al., Homosexuality - a   
   psychoanalytic study of male homosexuals (1962), account for a success   
   rate of 27% to exclusive heterosexuality. 106 homosexuals/bisexuals   
   took part. In this study 19% of the converted were exclusively   
   homosexual. Their conversion was verified in a follow-up study several   
   years later. There are other results that point in the same direction.   
      
   Are these results fabricated or misinterpreted? I no longer know what   
   to believe. Or are we just now experiencing an overthrow of the   
   scientific paradigm?   
      
   Homosexuality among animals is referred to when people try to   
   vindicate the notion of homosexuality as natural. But homosexual   
   intercourse is extremely uncommon among mammals. Sexual penetration   
   does not occur(?). I haven't heard of a single case. The bonobos are   
   supposed to represent homosexual behaviour, but they are really   
   "shaking hands". Dogs can do the same when they are elated and want to   
   express their primitive sense of love. They can start to "copulate"   
   the human baby, to the owner's embarrassment. But this does not   
   represent homosexuality, even if the baby belongs to the same sex. No   
   penetration occurs, and the dog isn't really sexually excited. The   
   feelings are related and thus the sexual behaviour is triggered.   
   Animals cannot express themselves as easily as us, so they resort to   
   whatever primitive way of expression they are in possession of.   
      
   Bonobos are always very worried that they should become outcasts. They   
   are quite cruel animals that resort to mobbing. They throw feces at   
   specatators and keepers at zoo, so they are diffucult, if not   
   impossible, to keep at zoo. They are obscene and extremely nasty.   
   That's why every bonobo always runs around psedo-copulating with   
   everybody else, to remain on friendly terms with the other members of   
   the flock. But this is like shaking hands. They are extremely afraid   
   that they should become victims of mobbing and be cast out, which is   
   an important motif also in human coteries.   
      
   Mats Winther   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)