Bisexuality / Homosexuality and Radical Feminism - Connection ?

[AngryAtheist8]

You are operating under the false assumption that this is a fool-proof science. Psychology is based more on theory than solid fact because everybody is different.

To say that the sources you provided have sealed the lid on all of the complex problems that arise from this topic is preposterous. In EVERY line of medical or psychological therapies there are alternatives because of this very fact.

At NO time did I ever claim that what Joe Dallas and Dr. Nicolosi are doing is the ONLY way to deal with homosexuality issues. Therefore, although it may be an alternative approach - it is certainly not “false information”. They have many cases to prove their point - even if you refuse to accept it.

What do you have to say about the success of these cases? Do you honestly think that they are pulling a fast one - lying about them?

I certainly think the doctors lying is a possibility.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Excuse me, I don’t need to paint anyone as ‘evil’, they do it themselves. I gave a whole list of quotes from very famous feminists and they all want the same thing. They drive a Marxist agenda and want the nuclear family destroyed. Denigrating men is one of their tools. The media holds them up as the ‘face of feminism’ and so it is they who press the agenda. Women, like you, who claim to be feminist, are actively supporting the radicals, even when you say you are not. Not until women who say they are not part of that radical set start marching in the streets calling for total support for the nuclear family and for the complimentarity of men and women to be recognised, will feminism be respected.

By the way, women have been allowed to vote, drive a car and get a job since forever.

False.

Women didn’t get the vote until 1920 in my country (the United States), and women gained the vote much later in many European countries. Outside of the West, women are denied the right to vote, own property, drive a car, and marry who they want in many countries.

Relevant link: teacher.scholastic.com/activities/suffrage/history.htm

 

[Elizabeth502]

BUT I notice the “rad trads” the radical traditionalists, they go nuts if they see a girl altar server or a woman lector, a woman getting with a mile of the altar, etc. and I think it’s more knee jerk and chauvenistic than it is theological and true to themselves. Sometimes people just want to keep things the same way as the “good old days” because they think everything should never change.

Actually, in fairness, some traditionalists, and even some non-traditionalists, see the matter of altar-serving as one of practicality: young men, who might possibly become priests, need role models and visual ones at that. They need to see the pattern of other males serving at the altar (as opposed to being supposedly horrified that females are also serving). The more often that men can visualize themselves up there at the altar, let alone also participating (as altar servers themselves), the more it makes the concept of priesthood a realizable one to them. At least, that’s the way I understand it.

And I agree. For females, altar-serving is a ‘dead-end’ job. They cannot go higher than that in the sanctuary. But there are lots of other fantastic leadership roles they can play in the church: as lectors, EMHC’s, as liturgical ministers, retreat leaders, and many other ministries within the parish. Most often there are far more females in lay ministry, in any given parish, than males.

We definitely need more men being open to the possibility of priesthood, and I see the whole aspect of male altar-serving as contributing to that. It’s a powerful visual.

 

[elvisman]

I think Kinsey put the number at about 10%. Estimates have varied on either side of that ever since, from as low as 2%. I am not sure what the current “best” estimate is. 20% seems higher than any estimate that I am aware of. But then, kids that age are walking hormone machines. If you look at the biological evidence, it appears that God intended us to be reproducing at that age. Our social norm is to postpone marriage. So, the kids are caught in a bind between their sexual urges and our moral standards. I hardly need to explain this. Presumably anyone reading this has been a teenager.

I would agree with you that the climate for sexual exploration is more permissive now than ever before, and that the Church stands in opposition to such behavior. I am not a parent. I understand that it is an ongoing challenge to instill moral values in a child. Every parent here might consider how he or she would handle a gay teen. Would you be a source of support while he or she tried to come to terms with a difficult problem, or would you turn your child away?

As a parent - I would never turn my daughter away.
I would counsel her in the faith and let her know that God has a purpose for everybody.

 

[elvisman]

An honest look at history would include acknowledging that women have usually been treated somewhere between property and 2nd class citizens in most times and places. A state of affairs that still prevails in many parts of the world.

And I would agree - so what’s your point?
This thread is about whether or not there is a connection between radical feminism and homosexuality.

I think there have been many great points made on this thread to show that there IS a very strong connection.

 

[elvisman]

I certainly think the doctors lying is a possibility.

Ahhh . . . broad and unfounded assumptions.
The last refuge of the truly desperate nay-sayer . . .

 

[elvisman]

I think its more likely that ‘cured’ homosexuals are lying to themselves and/or others.

And you are entitled to your opinion. I don’t know what it’s based on but it’s certainly doesn’t seem it’s the result of any clinical research . . .

I am a heterosexual male.

I did not choose to be heterosexual, nor could I simply will myself gay.

And nobody says that you should. **
Dr. Nicolosi and Joe Dallas engage in reparative therapy for those who DO have questions and ARE experiencing problems.
They arent kidnapping anybody and forcing their beliefs or therapeutic methods on them.

Why should we assume it is any different for gay people.

Because you may have not explored the possibility that your sexual proclivities are the result of conditioning.

**This is what I *don’t *understand by the nay-sayers. If somebody is having problems or questioning their sexuality and want to seek help from reparative therapy - HOW is this your business?

 

[Peepers]

As a parent - I would never turn my daughter away.
I would counsel her in the faith and let her know that God has a purpose for everybody.

As gay man, I can tell you that based on the limited amount I know of you from your posts on CAF, I would have been terrified to come to you for counsel as a teen. I really don’t mean this to be insulting, but there is no polite way to say it. I think your ignorance is astounding, mind boggling even. I hope there is a lot more intellectual curiosity and compassion about you than your posts suggest to me.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Well, that’s a cop out. particularly when you stated that “Without those “radical” feminists, not as many women would have higher aspirations…It takes dynamic leaders to shake up the status quo…” The “dynamic leaders” you referred to were the “rdicals” you also referred to and in post #15 you are saying they were needed to “shake up the status quo”. Now, when the underlying goals of those “dynamic leaders” are exposed, you suddenly start to try and dissasociate yourself from them. You mentioned the animal liberation activists. They have used the same tactics and the ignorant rank and file went along. Now we have it where even a famed Professor of Animal Rights, one Peter Singer, considered to be the ‘father’ of animal rights and who famously stated the Bible is myth, now says sex between animals and people is OK. By the way, Singer taught at Germaine Greer’s Alma Mater. The “radical” feminists are the ones who put in train the anti-family, Marxist driven ideology which has turned moral conventions on its head under the guise of “equality”, or as you put it, shook up the status quo. You supported their agenda and their tactics in post #15. By definition, you also must ‘own’ their extreme views as posted in response.

The suffragette Susan B. Anthony was a radical in her day, yet is she considered a hero of the pro-life movement (in the U.S.) now. There is even a group dedicated to getting pro-life women elected named after her (link to group: sba-list.org/).

 

[LemonAndLime]

And you are entitled to your opinion. I don’t know what it’s based on but it’s certainly doesn’t seem it’s the result of any clinical research . . .

Actually mainstream clinical research which has been peer-reviewed and published in medical/psychological journals agree that it is impossible to change your sexual orientation and attempting to do so is damaging. See: American Psychological Association.

Believing that it can be changed is actually against Church teaching, as the Church teaches that it is natural and intrinsic.

 

[LemonAndLime]

**I mean that there are significantly more people now claiming to be homosexual. **

---

**The 2000 U.S. Census Bureau said that homosexual couples made up less than 1% of households in America. **At that time, the Family Research Report claims that about 2-3% of men, and 2% of women, are either homosexual or bisexual. The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force said 3-8% of BOTH sexes were homosexual or bisexual.

---

In a microcosm of American youth (my former high school), there was only 1 single acknowledged homosexual when I went to school 29 years ago. As I stated in an earlier post – my Confirmations students who attend the very same school said that around 20% of the students now claim to be homosexual or bisexual.

---

We are being systematically conditioned as a society to be – not only tolerant of certain behaviors – but to celebrate them. A “don’t knock it until you’ve tried it” approach. It has actually become fashionable to experiment – even if you don’t have the natural inclination. *“It’s a countrywide *thing”, said Jessie Gilliam, project manager for the Washington-based gay and lesbian support group Youth Resource on Washington DC.

---

Shows aimed at adolescents like Glee, with its unrealistic view of the high school scene glamorize the homosexual behavior and make it seem that if you aren’t homosexual - or celebrate it – you’re some kind of Nazi. I don’t celebrate homosexual behavior because it is an abomination before God (Lev. 18:22, 20:13, Rom. 1:26-7). I tolerate those in society who have this burden – and it IS a burden for the Christian homosexual because they must remain chaste. I don’t celebrate a lifestyle that is diametrically opposed to the Word of God.

---

**I support those homosexuals who have the courage **to approach their lives with a Christian world view and not one pushed on them by a radical, anti-God agenda.

Homosexuality is increasing… or perhaps people are more likely to declare it?

Honestly, elvis - first rule of statistics: they don’t always tell you the cause.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Actually mainstream clinical research which has been peer-reviewed and published in medical/psychological journals agree that it is impossible to change your sexual orientation and attempting to do so is damaging. See: American Psychological Association.

Not according to those on and off CAF who have in fact discarded those previous “orientations” (otherwise known as lifestyles ). Unless we should conclude that they are liars, which would not only be uncharitable but terribly arrogant of any one of us to assume.

Believing that it can be changed is actually against Church teaching, as the Church teaches that it is natural and intrinsic.

No. The Church teaches that the causes are unknowable. Please do not misstate Church teaching

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained [nothing in there about “unchanging,” “natural,” or “intrinsic”. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have **deep-seated =/= ‘intrinsic’]homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination [nothing about “natural” in there], which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition [nothing in there about “natural” or “intrinsic”]

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Not according to those on and off CAF who have in fact discarded those previous “orientations” (otherwise known as lifestyles ). Unless we should conclude that they are liars, which would not only be uncharitable but terribly arrogant of any one of us to assume.

But where they actually “gay” in the first place? Or maybe they’re just bisexual? Many people in their teens experiment but later find that’s not what they like - does that mean they were “cured”?

No. The Church teaches that the causes are unknowable. Please do not misstate Church teaching

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained [nothing in there about “unchanging,” “natural,” or “intrinsic”. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have **deep-seated

=/= ‘intrinsic’]homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination [nothing about “natural” in there], which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition [nothing in there about “natural” or “intrinsic”]

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

The Church does not say that homosexuality is natural explicitly, but it certainly does not imply that it occurs as a result of nurture - and it does state it is incurable. The CC has turned its back on these “cures”.

 

[elvisman]

As gay man, I can tell you that based on the limited amount I know of you from your posts on CAF, I would have been terrified to come to you for counsel as a teen. I really don’t mean this to be insulting, but there is no polite way to say it. I think your ignorance is astounding, mind boggling even. I hope there is a lot more intellectual curiosity and compassion about you than your posts suggest to me.

Good thing you’re not my child because I would have told you to behave in a more mature manner. **

Your ability to have a rational discussion without falling to pieces and blurting out preposterous assumptions and blanket statements is astounding to me . . .

 

[Elizabeth502]

But where they actually “gay” in the first place? Or maybe they’re just bisexual? Many people in their teens experiment but later find that’s not what they like - does that mean they were “cured”?

The ones to whom I am referring, whose testimony I have read and seen/heard in the media, were not bisexual, according to them. It’s not up to you or to me to doubt their explanations of their experiences, and their perceptions of their changes.

The Church does not say that homosexuality is natural explicitly, but it certainly does not imply that it occurs as a result of nurture -

Nurture, yes. Meaning environment and relationships. The Church “believes” what it reads in the secular literature: that nurture is huge in the formation of sexuality. It also “believes” what it receives directly from those who discuss the development of their sexuality, both in terms of what these subjects report as conscious responses to environment, and what they admit are unconscious or unknown/unknowable reactions, responses, decisions.

and it does state it is incurable.

Cite the document for our reference. (Not your mistaken interpretation of an existing document, such as the misinterpretations I have just exposed)

The CC has turned its back on these “cures”.

The Church has not turned its back on long-term psychological counseling as providing hope for eventual restoration of the self, including restoration of heterosexuality as a possibility. The Church’s current thinking on this is that such an approach provides the best, most realistic opportunity for reversal of objectively disordered sexual practices, which in the Church’s teaching, homosexual acts are. The Church always seeks to heal, i.e., to restore the individual from disorder to order.

Clergy (not an official document, but clergy informally) understand that “instant” “cures” are improbable.

 

[elvisman]

Homosexuality is increasing… or perhaps people are more likely to declare it?

Honestly, elvis - first rule of statistics: they don’t always tell you the cause.

That’s why I posted the remark from Jessie Gilliam, project manager for a Washington-based gay and lesbian support group. Yes, even homosexuals themselves are admitting this phenomenon. Here is some more on the subject:
US girls embrace gay passion fashion

**Boy - I guess you told ME . . .

 

[Elizabeth502]

I think its more likely that ‘cured’ homosexuals are lying to themselves and/or others.

Yeah, why should we believe them? Why should we respect them whatsoever? Surely they are “plants” by the Roman Catholic Church. Surely these people who have suffered so much were merely coached to say what they said, or are being hypocritcal, deceitful. We should have no reason to honor their courage in coming out with their testimony, confronting themselves, and sharing that excruciating journey of self universally with complete strangers. There’s a Christian response.

I find it rather ironic that there are all sorts of CAF’ers who are eager to applaud the OP for exposing himself here, yet some are so quick to condemn those who have formerly lived a homosexual lifestyle, exposed themselves/their biographies publicly, yet they are not to be appaluded but regarded with suspicion.

Hmmm… I wonder what that could be about. Politics, maybe?

 

[LemonAndLime]

Yeah, why should we believe them? Why should we respect them whatsoever? Surely they are “plants” by the Roman Catholic Church. Surely these people who have suffered so much were merely coached to say what they said, or are being hypocritcal, deceitful. We should have no reason to honor their courage in coming out with their testimony, confronting themselves, and sharing that excruciating journey of self universally with complete strangers. There’s a Christian response.

I find it rather ironic that there are all sorts of CAF’ers who are eager to applaud the OP for exposing himself here, yet some are so quick to condemn those who have formerly lived a homosexual lifestyle, exposed themselves/their biographies publicly, yet they are not to be appaluded but regarded with suspicion.

Hmmm… I wonder what that could be about. Politics, maybe?

Indeed, these “cured homosexuals” have everything to do with politics. “This is a problem we can cure” gives hope to some Christians who fear it, while also marginalising further those who apparently “choose” to be gay despite this “cure”.

Fact - the ones who are touting these cures come from a Christian and biased background.

Fact - those who have submitted peer-reviewed proof that homosexuality is naturally occuring and cannot be cured very rarely have a proven agenda. Although of course the immediate response to that on this forum is “they’re part of the hidden homosexualist agenda” - to that I say this; prove it.

 

[LemonAndLime]

That’s why I posted the remark from Jessie Gilliam, project manager for a Washington-based gay and lesbian support group. Yes, even homosexuals themselves are admitting this phenomenon. Here is some more on the subject:
US girls embrace gay passion fashion

**Boy - I guess you told *ME ***. . .

But can you prove that homosexuality is increasing, and that people weren’t just hiding it before?

 

[Elizabeth502]

Indeed, these “cured homosexuals” have everything to do with politics.

You misplaced the reference of my remarks, L&L. They weren’t addressed to you. They were addressed to the reality that homosexuals who “come out” are revered & praised, whereas previous homosexuals are despised and discredited. That is what I was referring to as politics.

Fact - the ones who are touting these cures come from a Christian and biased background.

Does Christian equal “biased” in your view? Because it’s pretty provocative right there, on a Catholic forum, to ally Christian with “biased,” and further to discredit any testimony of a Christian person. That’s quite a statement, coming from a Christian, amd in 3 days, a Catholic.

Fact - those who have submitted peer-reviewed proof that homosexuality is naturally occuring and cannot be cured very rarely have a proven agenda.

#1 - “Naturally occurring” does not mean what you are declaring or assuming it to mean.

#2 - You have no substantiation that those who publish the material which you prefer to other published material “very rarely have a proven agenda.” That may be your gut feeling or your assumption, but there is no objective evidence for that.