My husband and I read Dr. Nicolosi’s book, which introduced us to the idea of reparative therapy. I would suggest that you do some more investigation. The whole theory of reparative therapy is based upon the theory that those with a homosexual orientation developed such orientation due to a failure to adequately bond with the same sex parent. Treatment is entirely based upon this theory, the goal of which is to heal or “repair” this failure to bond. That is why the therapist that treated my son was so convinced that my son must be repressing memories of sexual abuse. He had no discernable lack of bonding with his father. In fact, the therapist determined that he had developed healthy, properly bonding relationships with both of his parents, which is why he was so convinced that there must have been sexual abuse. The theory did not fit my son, and as well intentioned as this therapist may have been, he could not explain my son’s homosexual orientation unless my son was a victim of sexual abuse, which my son clearly believed had never occurred. He underwent hypnosis, which produced nothing. And when the therapist encouraged him to consider further his interactions with his uncle, my son had had enough. That is when he informed us about this direction in therapy.
I remember very clearly that in his book, Dr. Nicolosi recommends the adoption of traditional masculine gender roles as an important therapeutic tool. I remember this specifically because my son already embodied the typical masculine gender roles. His book seemed very focused on laying out a treatment plan for a specific kind of homosexual person, which he seemed to assume applied to all homosexual people, but he was quite mistaken.
Actually, I just got the book in the mail yesterday…haha…and so I read the whole first part of it, about his theory of reparative therapy.
Having now read part of the book, I can understand a little bit more the claims about “putting all SSA individuals in a box”. There is tons of him citing studies which show all these things about father-son relationships and mother-son relationships and how important especially the father-son thing is in a male’s (very) early life. I will say, however, that there are plenty of “percentages” cited, and there is never a 100% cited; in fact, the majority of percentages cited are probably in the 50% - 75% range, meaning in the majority of these studies he cites, 25-50% of homosexuals did not display whatever “typical characteristic” of homosexuality (or “pre-homosexuality” which he sometimes mentions) the study was studying.
To be honest, even before I read the first part of the book, I knew I didn’t (at least fully) believe that I have a terrible relationship with my father, so believe me, this is something I’m being extremely cautious about. However: I don’t want to say anything about your son and you and your husband’s relationship with him specifically, but I know for me that, though I was certainly never physically abused by him, and I have always had at least a decent relationship (if not good) with him, there are other aspects of my relationship with him which I think leave the door open for there to be some merits to Nicolosi’s theories and all of those studies he cites. I’m not sure if he himself would say this, but it seems to me that based on all of the information he threw onto the table, the (perceived) relationship with the father does not have to be bad in order for many of the things to be true regarding being accepted and affirmed in a the true male identity.
And I’ll (sort of) eat my words regarding what I said about “typical guy things” and whatnot - I’m not sure if I expressed adequately what I meant to say when I wrote that. On one hand, you can’t just totally dismiss the studies which he cited on that matter, I think all/most of which found that a high (or at least majority) percentage of homosexuals did “feminine” things in their early childhood. On the other hand, I think my point still stands that it is not the “feminine” actions themselves that is the problem - it is more an internal - i.e., struggling with male identity - issue, which I think then makes it safe to say that even from an early age, it is possible there are some identity issues a male child could have which could manifest themselves through “feminine” actions/mannerisms.
In any case, even though not all of the first part of the book really resonated with my experience, other parts without question did. And I understand it won’t be the same with others, and he says that in his book - not everyone who has come to him had the same developmental problems, or “fits in the box” as a few on here would say. I just don’t see that as a negative thing, and though I am sure that in some cases, reparative therapists have tried to force negative memories on clients, but I really doubt that all do. My current therapist, as I mentioned previously, I think uses many/most of Nicolosi’s ideas but I don’t think he follows it as if it is his Gospel or something…lol. My experience so far has led me to believe he is open to working through these “differences”, those things which I am seeing make me NOT fit in “Nicolosi’s Box” (hahaha). If I ever get the strong impression that he is not open to this, I will be out the door.
It is not my wish to discourage you from reparative therapy, I only caution you to be well informed about what you are getting into. My most heartfelt prayers go out to you. I wish you all the best in your journey and pray for a positive outcome to your therapy. God bless you.
Thanks, I really appreciate that!
), a distant father (which certainly was not true, as he had always been much closer to and spent more time with his father and idolized his older brothers), and was possibly the victim of sexual abuse by another man. This was the real deal breaker for my son. Because the theory did not fit as far as the parental influence, this therapist tried to convince him that he had been molested and was encouraging him to remember abuse that never happened.