Dr. Nicolosi and homosexuality

by JWinSF 20 Replies latest jw experiences

• 

  JWinSF

  I was going to respond to ISPs topic on Preventing Homosexuality Dr. J Nicolosi, but due to its number of responses, decided to start a new topic.

  Nicolosi's comments were prominently referred to in the three 1995 Awake! articles about homosexuality in the "Young People Ask" section. I had just come out recently and read the articles. I DAd in 1994. A close JW sister friend of mine had gotten me a subscription [which was not really desired by me]. But, after having accepted my orientation at the age of 45 only 1 year earlier and being ingrained with the societal imprint of negativity about homosexuality due to my pre-Stonewall formative years and JW exposure since childhood, I still wanted to read as much as possible to be SURE that I was OK as I was. That nothing "made" me gay.

  So, I with great eagerness went to the public library to look up Nicolosi. All I could find out about him was in a journal that had critical reviews of new books. In it, Nicolosi was thoroughly discredited. Naturally, the JWs would use anyone that would further support their tortured reasoning, whether the person was a reliable source or not.

  Nicolosi belongs to the old world school of cause/effect on homosexuality. I'm personally not aware of any psychologists/psychiatrists/counselors that submit to that line of reasoning anymore unless they are personally of the religious right mentality.

  In my own case up to the point of my disassociating due to my sexual orientation I [1] never had sexual relations with members of my own sex, [2] did not knowingly associate with gay people in my business life [as an active/avid JW, my dealings outside of work were always with JWs], [3] had an active father figure in my home up to the time I was in 11th grade [parents divorcing then] yet my same sex attractions were clear in my mind dating back to at least 7th grade. In short, all of Nicolosi's causes for my being gay were absent in my life.

  There is nothing wrong in itself with being gay. Those in society who look down upon gays do not prevent homosexuality from happening. They only make if more difficult for gays to have feelings of self worth. Thankfully, society as a whole, as each decade passes by, is coming to the realization that they've been fed a great deal of myths about what its like to be homosexual.

  After having accepted myself for being gay from birth and having left the BS of the WTBTS by disassociating, I became a much happier person. I started the San Francisco Gay/Lesbian Former Jehovah's Witnesses Support Group in March 1994. Today due to Jim Moon's [he was the first person to respond to my ad] active Webmaster efforts and coining the collective term "A Common Bond" [due to his prior efforts to have a gay/lesbian mailing list for former Jehovah's Witnesses] we are now international. Check out our web site www.gayxjw.org for information on the Bible vs. Homosexuality, Pedophilia, and other interesting topics and links to other sites.

  Edited by - jwinsf on 17 June 2002 19:44:51
• 

  beckyboop

  Thank you for sharing your story, and for exposing Dr. Nicolosi and the wts for their underhanded and untruthful tactics. It's such a shame that they try so hard to make everyone just like them--unable to love others unconditionally.

  I love posts like this one, and look forward to more. BTW, I posted my experience of being married to a gay man for 8 years on the other thread. I learned a lot about unconditional love during that time of my life--and we are best friends still! (sorry if my story is long, I've led an eventful life!;))

  Becky
• 

  Simon

  Thanks JWinSF

  I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds 'understanding' and 'acceptance' a difficult thing because of my JW upbringing.

  I'm learning though
• 

  Sabine

  Thanks for your post, and for providing support for gay/lesbian exjws. Many of my single best friends in the borg. were gay/lesbian...some where aware and trying to lead c elibate lives, others were just in agony trying to figure out what was "wrong" with them.

  One thing being enslaved to the cult cost me was a relationship with my brother, who was gay. As circumstances turned out, I was able to be at his bedside when he died of AIDS in 95. Eventhough I shunned him all my life, he still loved me. He left trust funds for my kids to go to college in his will. I felt so guilty when I found out. Now that was unconditional love on his part...
• 

  FriendlyFellaAL

  Sabine - Your story brought tears to my eyes. I'm thankful that you were able to spend some quality time with him before his passing. You shouldn't have felt guilty about the trust funds, though. It just proves how much he loved you and your children.

  Brian
• 

  Pete2

  Nicolosi is also the darling of the right-wing fundamentalists. Even Nicolosi admited in an interview that homosexual desires are still present with alledged ex-gays -- they're supposed to "suppress" them and sublimate with a vagina while they fantasize about men. You know, the old "there is no elephant in the livingroom."

  Pete2
• 

  singsongboi

  I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds 'understanding' and 'acceptance' a difficult thing because of my JW upbringing.

  simon - i can appreciate that you may well find it difficult......

  but please consider, you are str8 --- for you it's kind of academic.

  but for some kid that may exist in one of the former congs. that you were associated with -- it's much more than academic...

  if you struggle, how much more will this kid... his need for "understanding and acceptance" will be on 2 levels..

  first, he will need to understand and accept himself , then he will need to get it from others --

  do you think that will happen????

  I doubt that it will in any cong..

  so what then, if he come to understand and accept himself, he stands a good chance of making a good life (but not as a jw) -- but increasingly as "acceptance" of gays and lesbians grows in the general community, as "role models" become visible, kids are making good lives for themselves..

  if he fails to find personal "acceptance", i guess he will have a difficult life, probably ghetto-ise himself, drink or do drugs TOO much...(an observation that is not condemnatory) or may kill himself.

  this is a generalisation, of course...

  the point of my post is simply to highlight the need to grow that "understanding and acceptance."

  of course, some will want to see this as 'pushing' the homosexual agenda, whatever that is.... but, i prefer to see it simply, as helping build a world where all can live.

  the worst enemy of this sort of life is religions.

  Edited by - singsongboi on 19 June 2002 17:33:27
• 

  Kingpawn

  I was going through past threads and came upon this one.

  Simon, you can at least commend yourself for trying to understand us. So many people don't.

  One book you might want to check out (I was going to recommend this as well to a guy id'ed as "Stormrider" but his post of "Are there gay JW's?" ended and he hasn't returned since) is "What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality" by Daniel J. Helminiak, Ph.D.

  He takes a "historical-critical" approach in interpreting Scripture. For example: Stormrider maintained Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because the inhabitants desired sex with the angels. Helminiak notes that in those days, the worst thing an inhabitant of the city (BTW Lot, by living there, was a Sodomite though not gay) was not to provide hospitality to strangers. And since it was a patriarchial society, women were, literally, property--to be done with as their male superior wanted. This explains why he could offer his daughters to the crowd in exchange for them leaving the strangers alone. If he had allowed the angels to come to harm Lot would have violated that custom. See also Ezekiel 16:49, 50 which lists Sodom's sins, and immorality wasn't among them.

  If this will help, use what I call the PET (Practical Effects Test) approach. Does another person's skin color, religion, sexual orientation, whatever--affect my paycheck, property taxes, kid's SAT scores, etc? If not, why concern myself with it? But to some people out there the issue can't be let go of. You don't strike me as that type and I'm glad.
• 

  spaz

  Hi,

  I believe individuals that experience same-sex sexual attraction will forever be ostracized by religious people for many reasons. Homosexual orientation is the involuntary mechanism of the mind that religionists will not try to understand; they generally equate it with homosexual behaviour and this is not fair. Equally, it may not be fair to throw Nicolosi and the WTS into the same basket.

  Homosexuality is difficult to define. Many have sought to understand its cause. Mid-20th century psychological explanations were unsatisfactory. Havelock Henry Ellis may have been the first to propose a physiologic cause for this mystery and researchers of the past three decades unsuccessfully sought explanation in clinical studies. No hard evidence was forthcoming for a biologic cause. You have to see the issue in the light of efforts to understand it. To simply condemn homosexuality failed the individual who suffers the anguish when first confronted with the orientation.

  The APA once considered homosexuality a mental disorder, but through sheer bullying by homosexual activists changed their position in 1973. Other individuals in the mental health field who maintain it has a psychologic cause and cure have been censured by professional fraternities and this is why Nicolosi et.al are ridiculed to this day. But you can't deny success; and Socarides, Nicolosi and others have aided sufferers to divest themselves from the orientation. The homosexual activists don't want this approach and perpetuate other myths for its cause. There exists a huge population of former homosexuals now living heterosexual identities. You seldom hears about them in the media and the activists don't want to know about them either.

  Ultimately, it comes down to what the individual decides. He(or she) may find the orientation compatible and choose to engage in the behaviour. At this juncture same-sex sex becomes no different from heterosexual fornication as far as affiliation with any group, religious or otherwise, that deems it to be incompatible with their codes of acceptable behaviour.

  Groups like the WTS, unfortunately, are not equipped to help their members with any human weakness or tendency. It is much easier to label a suffer and ostracize him or her, whatever the problem.
• 

  Kingpawn

  Spaz,

  I take issue with the following:

  Socarides, Nicolosi and others have aided sufferers to divest themselves from the orientation.

  Sufferers!? The only "suffering" I have is being called queer, faggot, pansy, fag, and so on. Or from knowing that as the law now stands I can be fired from my job, thrown out of my apartment (if I had one), lose custody/visitation rights in a divorce, be denied service in a restaurant or hotel, even be denied credit--all legally, unless cities have passed ordinances banning some or all of these practices (see www.gayrightsinfo.com if interested). The gay community didn't ask for these laws; people who think being gay is a choice did. Apparently they feel this is an economic disincentive that will make gays "change."

  Divest themselves? Again, you seem to fall into the trap of sexual orientation being a choice. Two questions then: (1) when did you decide to be whatever your orientation is? Bet you can't come up with a day or a time. You didn't choose any more than I did. And (2) given the disadvantages cited above, why would someone voluntarily choose such a lifestyle? A police officer, soldier, or spy risks their life in the performance of their job because they are serving a higher goal. What higher goal does a person who's anything other than straight serve by "choosing" such a bleak alternative?

  Understand I don't necessarily consider you anti-gay. I would like to offer food for thought to whoever else decides to read or post here.

  Mark