A great analysis on what a "pathology" can be.

This is a post on the extremist views of religious fundamentalists, and how they put "purity" up on a pedestal. In his weekly column this week, Wayne Besen illustrates how this is a "pathology" because a preacher will extol the virtues of "purity" and then in the next breath tell their congregants that they will always "fall short." This ensures that they continue to beat themselves up and keep coming to church to find "repentence." Before I link you to Wayne Besen's article, I would like to tell you a little about an organization that makes frequent use of the words "pathology" and "purity."

This is what NARTH (National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality) published on their web page in August 2009.

The American Psychological Association (APA) and other mental health organizations have objected to providing psychological care to those who are distressed by unwanted homosexual attractions on a number of grounds. These objections include scientifically unsupportable claims that:
1. There is no conclusive or convincing evidence that sexual orientation may be changed through reorientation therapy.
2. Efforts to change sexual orientation are shown to be harmful and can lead to greater self-hatred, depression, and other self-destructive behaviors.
3. There is no greater pathology in the homosexual population than in the general population.

I am in the process of researching out a response to NARTH's counterclaim, but for this blog post I want to focus your attention on point #3...about "pathology."

Wikipedia defines a pathology as "the study and diagnosis of disease." I guess what that means from NARTH's position (but NOT from the APA position) is that homosexuality is a disease that propogates other psychological diseases, or "pathologies." In their response to the APA report NARTH writes the following:

"An objective synthesis of the clinical and research literature derived from
hundreds of sources reveals numerous scientific findings:

• Despite knowing the AIDS risk, homosexuals repeatedly and pathologically
  continue to indulge in unsafe sex practices.
• Homosexuals represent the highest number of STD cases.
• Many homosexual sex practices are medically dangerous, with or without
  protection.
• More than one-third of homosexual men and women are substance abusers.
• Forty percent of homosexual adolescents report suicidal histories.
• Homosexuals are more likely than heterosexuals to have mental health
  concerns, such as eating disorders, personality disorders, paranoia, depression,
  and anxiety.
• Homosexual relationships are more violent than heterosexual relationships.

Societal bias and discrimination do not, in and of themselves, contribute to the majority of
increased health risks for homosexuals. The usual hypothesis is that societal discrimination against homosexuals is solely or primarily responsible for the development of this pathology. However, specific attempts to confirm this societal discrimination hypothesis have been
unsuccessful, and the alternative possibility—that these conditions may somehow be related to the psychological structure of a homosexual orientation or consequences of a homosexual lifestyle—has not been disconfirmed.

Indeed, several cross-cultural studies suggest that this higher rate of psychological disturbance is in fact independent of a culture's tolerance of—or hostility toward—homosexual behavior. We believe that further research that is uncompromised by politically-motivated bias should be carried out to evaluate this issue.

A client's desire to prevent or cease experiencing such a variety of serious medical, psychological, and relational health risks is sufficient reason for anyone to seek and receive competent psychological care to minimize or resolve the desires, behaviors and lifestyles associated with such increased risks. The concerns of parents, family members and friends of persons whose sexual behaviors and/or attractions leave him or her at risk for such harms are understandable and scientifically justified. Mental health professionals ethically may offer psycho-educational and therapeutic assistance to families with such concerns in a manner that respects their loved one's age-appropriate needs for autonomy, self-determination, and confidentiality and that otherwise preserves the integrity of the therapeutic relationship."

Just like the Klu Klux Klan would probably consider a study of the "pathology" that creates the "angry black man" stereotype to be "politically motivated," NARTH will reject any study that is based on the assumption that a man could be born "gay." NARTH (like the KKK,) will not concede that if you deny a class a people status as "human beings," then you just might be putting them at a disadvantage for generations to come. (At least the slaves achieved the status of being 3/5's of a person, but only because their owner wanted their share of taxes and additional voting power. The KKK has never conceded them any status to this day.) I will never pretend that my plight as a gay man is even comparable to the centuries of suffering for the slaves, but it makes my blood boil when a privileged white heterosexual Christian male tries to argue that women, people of color, immigrants, and the GLBT community need to just "get over it."

What the APA said in their recent published findings (after an exhaustive two year study of every piece of research out there) is that it is "unethical" to try to tell a patient that his/her feelings are things that he/she are making up in their head. Worse than unethical, it should be illegal! The report is as exhaustive as any science will ever produce, but NARTH is not about science. NARTH is about religion, which is, by its very nature, incompatible with science! They cannot admit that science has now proven that these feelings define a person from birth to be who they are. Trying to change that through therapy will create any number of pathologies that NARTH extolled in the list above, which is what Wayne Besen's article (below) expands on.

I am a noun. I was born a homosexual. I have never known any other feelings than those that I now have. I didn't "learn" this attraction to men as a result of my childhood environment or from any sexual abuse as a child (which NARTH still claims in the above link.) I had originally thought that the Mormon Church had backed away from doing this, but a footnote at the above NARTH link reminds the reader on what the proper use of the word "homosexual" is...that it is NEVER to be used as a noun. Just recently the mailing address for NARTH changed from California to Utah. That wasn't a coincidence.

In closing, please read Wayne Besen's essay on "The Pathology of Purity."

Please note that the essay features a prominent reference to "The Family," which is at the pinnacle of the "right to privilege" for white, heterosexual, Christian men. The very existence of "The Family" is to ensure that this "privilege" is retained through powerful political means.
Link here.