XPost: alt.psychology, sci.psychology.theory, alt.psychology.jung   
   From: mlwi@swipnet.se   
      
   "M Winther"  skrev i meddelandet   
   news:4fbb1922$0$3800$c83e3ef6@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...   
   > 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   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
      
   By the way, this is an amusing example of notoriously copulating dog:   
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZwi1blPO8k   
      
   Mats   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)