Wednesday, December 26, 2018

'Progression of Homosexuality\r'

'Abstract Progression of homoeroticism: Evolution of a pheno custodyon over epoch Some authors believe that homophile(prenominal)ity is non a kind of conduct, as ordinarily supposed, but a psychological develop (Woggon, 1981). Thus, it is important to understand that the genuine sapphic check over or inversion, as it is very much termed. This condition is something for which the dependant is in no substance responsible. Some literary productions suggests that jocundness in itself it is m oral examinationly neutral. Like the condition of straightity, however, it tends to find expression in specialized cozy acts; and much(prenominal) acts be subject to moral judg handst (McNeill, 1966).\r\nA major(ip) premise ceremonious in modern literature is the concept that intimate predilection ranges along a continuum, as debate to simply being heterointimate or gay. It is possible that this is mainly beca give increased economic aid has been paid to the haul and non stil l the action. Braverman (1973) has examined a eggshell developed by Kinsey, who prospect that oddity is a everyday manifestation of serviceman versedity. This scale operationalizes the continuum. tidy sum are rated on a scale of zero to six.\r\nZero representing exclusive heterosexual inclinations and six exclusive homophile(prenominal) inclinations. Those who take in’t fall into both extremum feel a mixture of some(prenominal) to varying degrees. This middle group is theoretically bisexual person. However, people who are close to either extreme tend to be draped into that respective category. This absorption leaves only those appressed to the centre in the bisexual group. just about inquiry conducted has grouped people into these triple categories. The Causes of crotchet Fathers, on the other hand, were thought to prefer the other children.\r\nIn doing so, fathers failed to cherish the child from the destructive influence of the obtain. The researchers esp ousing biologic and ingredienttic causes of transvesticity were considered to be beautify in those times. flat so, thither were studies corroborating much(prenominal) causes. Kallman (1952) conducted a study in which masculine homosexual monozygotic twins were found to be significantly more confusable (in terms of homosexual tendencies) than dizygotic twins. These results were not taken to mean that inheritable account was a necessary condition for the festering of homosexuality. Rather, it was generally hought by proponents, that a inheritable strong-arm trait takeed a role in the cultural pliant of a homosexual. In other words, if a vernal antheral or effeminate exhibited physical characteristics associated with the opposite gender that private would soak up been treated as if they were homosexual. This would in turn influence their development (a self-fulfilling prophecy). Silberner (1984) referred to a study conducted by the State University of unexampled Y ork, in which researchers found a physical correlate to homosexual behavior. They went further to close up that biological markers for sexual orientation whitethorn exist.\r\nEven so, researchers do it clear that findings did not focus on definite causes of homosexuality. However, it was admitted that on that point was a real possibility that there is a biological element of the phenomenon. Even into the 1990’s this vein of research has continued. For example, spindle (1993) identified that significant progress had been made in the pursuit of identifying a gene that may influence some instances of anthropoid homosexuality. It was suggested that a gene inside a small segment of the X chromosome (passed from mother to son), contributes to the sexual orientation of a subset of homosexual men.\r\nInterestingly, a tendency to focus on male homosexuals in scientific research can be seen at this stage. Although an thoroughgoing(a) list of studies on homosexuality cannot be pro vided in this forum (nor would it be practical), from a re adopt of the available literature, this is con unattackableed. The APA removed homosexuality from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of psychological Disorders in 1973. In 1975 it then released a state-supported statement that homosexuality was not a psychical disorder. In 1994, both decades later, the APA finally stated, â€Å"… omosexuality is neither a mental illness nor a moral depravity. It is the way a portion of the population expresses human love and sexuality” From the premises established in this section, a holistic exercise of world-views regarding homosexuality, can be detailed. World Views of Homosexuality Secular As discussed previously, the first half(prenominal) (and a little beyond) of the 20th coke spawned varying views of homosexuality (constitutional, developmental and genetic were the main ones). However, the worldviews resulting from such were congruent in the main.\r\nThis is prim arily because of the fact that these theories were aiming to explain the concomitant of a class of aberration/disorder. Consequently, claims, such as homosexuality being sort as a serious psychiatrical and social problem (Bieber, 1969), were commonplace in academic literature and reverberated in the immenser society. The course of time into the final quarter of the give out century, realized a progressively softer seat regarding homosexuality, by both from the academic and wider community. This soften can be observed as being simultaneous with stances adopted by the APA.\r\nAfter the organization’s actions in 1973 and 1975 concerning word meaning of homosexuality, the literature had been littered with expressions of the wide variability in the social acceptance of homosexual activity (Greenberg & Bystryn, 1982). Christian The ELCA encourages its congregations to refreshing gay and lesbian persons as perform members, but it does not allow for the praise or aff irmation of gay or lesbian relationships. Specifically, the ordained, commissioned, and consecrated ministries…are subject to homosexuals only it they remain celibate and no provisions exist for the blessing of same-gender unions (Childs, 2003, p. 32). From these authoritative points of view, a sense of where Christianity stands with regard to homosexuality is only halfway complete (at best). man-to-man members of the Church, including clergymen, sometimes have conflicting views. As demonstrated, a plethora of worldviews exist, with regards to homosexuality. It is as a result of these, that there are respective(a) views of the role that psychology and counseling should play in the life of a homosexual and the phenomenon (homosexuality), as a whole. Role of psychological science/ counsel Conclusion\r\nThroughout the literature reviewed for this paper, the themes of variability and non-consensus are recurrent. There has been no conclusive study which has unearthed potential causes of homosexuality. nonessential worldviews are varied across and sluice in spite of appearance secular and religious sources, allowing for no clear-cut path for psychologists/counselors to take in dealing with the phenomenon. By looking at past and current events in the field, it appears as though distinct lines will be drawn, but in non-traditional ways, namely, within as opposed to without. This is with reference to the dichotomy within\r\nChristian and secular views of homosexuality. It appears as though the only area of near-consensus is the view that homosexuals (distinct from homosexuality) are not to be condemned, or view as inherently pathological. Holding firm to this premise, further research and interest from the assorted interest groups may be skilful to all. References A vicious intolerance. (2009, September 19). Economist, 392(8649). trus dickensrthy Version King James Bartoli, E. , & Gillem, A. R. (2008). go on to depolarize the debate on sexual orie ntation and religious identity element and the healing(predicate) process.\r\nProfessional psychology: Research and Practice, 39, 202-209. Benoit, M. (2005). counterpoint between religious commitment and same-sex attraction: Possibilities for a virtuous response. Ethics & Behavior, 15, 309â€325. Bieber, I. (1969). Homosexuality. The American daybook of Nursing, 69(12), 2637-2641. Bieber, I. , Dain, H. J. , Dince, P. R. , Drellich, M. G. , Grand, H. G. , Gundlach, R. H. , et al. (1962). Homosexuality: A psychoanalytical study. spick-and-span York: Basic Books. Binder, C. V. (1977). Affection prepare: An alternative to sexual reorientation. ledger of Homosexuality, 2, 251-259.\r\nBower, B. (1993). inherited Clue to young-begetting(prenominal) Homosexuality Emerges. erudition tonics, 144(3), 37. Broman, C. L. (2003). invokeuality Attitudes: The Impact of Trauma. The journal of hinge on Research, 40(4), 351-357. Brooke, H. L. (2005). â€Å"gays, ex-gays, ex-ex-gay s: Examining key religious, ethical, and diversity Issues”: A finish interview with Douglas Haldeman, Ariel Shidlo, Warren Throckmorton, and Mark Yarhouse. daybook of psychological science and Christianity, 24, 343-351. Bullough, V. L. (1976). intimate variance in society and history. New York: Wiley. Campos, P. E. , & Goldfried, M. E. 2001). Introduction: Perspectives on gay, lesbian, and bisexual clients. diary of clinical Psychology, 57, 609-613. Childs, J. M. (2003). plica Conversation: Christian Perspectives on Homosexuality. Minneapolis: Fortress, 132. Cianciotto, J. , & Cahill, S. (2006). jejuneness in the crosshairs: The third wave of ex-gay activism. New York: National homophile(a) and sapphic lying-in Force. Davison, G. C. (1976). Homosexuality: The ethical challenge. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 44, 157-162. Davison, G. C. (1978). Not can but ought: The manipulation of homosexuality.\r\nJournal of Consulting and Clinical Psycholo gy, 46, 170â€172. Davison, G. C. , & Wilson, G. T. (1973). Attitudes of behaviour therapists toward homosexuality. Behavior Therapy, 4, 686-696. Ellis, A. (1956). The effectiveness of psychotherapy with individuals who have severe homosexual problems. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 20, 191-195. Ellis, A. (1959). A homosexual treated with rational psychotherapy. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 15, 338-343. Ellis, A. (1965). Homosexuality: Its causes and cure. New York: Lyle Stuart. Erzen, T. (2006). corking to Jesus: Sexual and Christian modulations in the ex-gay movement.\r\nLos Angeles: University of California Press. Freud, S. (1962). Three Essays on the possibility of Sexuality (J. Strachey, Trans. ). New York: Basic Books. (Original incline published 1905). Good, R. (2000). homo Behavioral genetic science/ Sexual Orientation. The American Biology Teacher, 62(5), 322-324. Greenspoon, J. , & Lamal, P. A. (1987). A behavioristic approach. In L. Diamant (Ed), Ma le and young-bearing(prenominal) homosexuality: psychological approaches (pp. 109-128). Washington, DC: Hemisphere. Hacking, I. (2002). How â€Å" inborn” are â€Å"Kinds” of Sexual Orientation?. constabulary and Philosophy, 21(1), 95-107. Haldeman, D. C. (2004).\r\nWhen sexual and religious orientation bump around: Considerations in working with conflicted same-sex attracted male clients. _The Counseling Psychologist, 32, 691-715. _ Hart, T. A. , & Heimberg, R. G. (2001). Presenting problems among treatment-seeking gay, lesbian, and bisexual youth. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 57, 615-627. Herek, G. M. (2000). The Psychology of Sexual Prejudice. Current Directions in Psychological skill, 9(1), 19-22. James, S. (1978). Treatment of homosexuality: II. Superiority of desensitization/arousal as compared with anticipatory avoidance conditioning: Results of a controlled trial.\r\nBehavior Therapy, 9, 28-36. Jones, S. L. , & Yarhouse, M. A. (2007). Ex-gay? A longitudinal study of religiously intermediate alter in sexual orientation. sedative’s Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press. Kallmann, F. J. (1952). Comparative parallel Study on the Genetic Aspects of Male Homosexuality. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 115(1), 283-298. Katz, J. (1995). Gay American history: Lesbians and gay men in the United States. New York: doubting Thomas Crowell. King, M. , Smith, G. , & Bartlett, A. (2004). Treatments of homosexuality in Britain since the 1950’sâ€an oral history: The experience of professionals.\r\nBritish medical Journal, 328, 429-432. Kinsey, A. C. et al. (1948). Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Co. , 610-666. Langevin, R. (1983). Sexual strands: Understanding and treating sexual anomalies in men. New York: Erlbaum. LeVay, S. (1996). Queer science: The use and abuse of research in homosexuality. Cambridge: mamma Institute Technology Press. Maguire, D. (1983). The morality of hom osexual marriage. A Challenge to Love: Gay and Lesbian Catholics in the Church (R. Nugent ed. ), New York: Crossroad Martell, C. R. , Safren, S. A. , & Prince, S. E. (2004).\r\nCognitive behavioural therapies with lesbian, gay, and bisexual clients. New York: Guilford Press. Massett, L. (1969). Homosexuality: changes on the way. Science News, 96(24), 557-559. McMinn, L. G. (2005). Sexual identity concerns for Christian young adults: Practical considerations for being a adjunct presence and compassionate companion. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 24, 368-377. McNeill, J. J. (1966). The church and the Homosexual. Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, 42-66. Moberly, E. (1983). Homosexuality: A new Christian ethic. Greenwood, SC: covered stadium Press. Murphy, T. F. (1992).\r\nRedirecting sexual orientation: Techniques and justifications. Journal of Sex Research, 29, 501-523. Murphy, T. F. (1997). Gay science: The ethics of sexual orientation research. New York: Columbi a University Press. Nicolosi, J. (1991). Reparative therapy of male homosexuality. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson. Nicolosi, J. , Byrd, A. D. , & Potts, R. W. (2000). Retrospective self-reports of changes in homosexual orientation: A consumer survey of conversion therapy clients. Psychological Reports, 86, 1071-1088. O’Leary, J. S. (1987). Sexual Orientation. The Furrow, 38(11), 680-685. Phillips, J. C. (2004).\r\nA welcome addition to the literature: Non-polarized approaches to sexual orientation and religiosity. The Counseling Psychologist, 32, 771-777. Ponticelli, C. M. (1999). Crafting stories of sexual identity reconstruction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 62, 157-172. Safren, S. A. , & Rogers, T. (2001). Cognitive behavioural therapy with gay, lesbian, and bisexual clients. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 57, 629-643. Shidlo, A. , & Schroeder, M. (2002). ever-changing sexual orientation: A consumer’s report. Professional Psychology: Research and Pract ice, 33, 249-259. Silberner, J. (1984). internal secretion Markers for Homosexuality?\r\nScience News, 126(13), 198-199. Silverstein, C. (1991). Psychological and medical treatments of homosexuality. In J. C. Gonsiorek & J. D. Weinrich (Eds. ), Homosexuality: Research implications for public policy (pp. 101-114). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Silverstein, C. (2007), Wearing two hats: The psychologist as activist and therapist. J_ournal of Gay & Lesbian Psychotherapy, 11_(3/4), 9-35. Spitzer, R. L. (2003). Can some gay men and lesbians change their sexual orientation? devil hundred participants reporting a change from homosexual to heterosexual orientation. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32, 403-417.\r\nStevenson, I. , & Wolpe, J. (1960). Recovery from sexual deviations through overcoming fissiparous neurotic responses. American Journal of Psychiatry, 116, 737-742. Stevenson, M. R. (1988). Promoting border for Homosexuality: An Evaluation of Intervention Strategies. The Jo urnal of Sex Research, 25(4), 500-511. Tan, E. (2008). Mindfulness in sexual identity therapy: A case study. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 27, 274-278. Thomson, & Devine. (1998, May 5). Homosexuality: biologically or environmentally constructed. Retrieved October 18, 2009, from Wolkomir, M. (2001).\r\nEmotion work, commitment, and the corroboration of the self: The case of gay and exgay Christian support groups. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 30, 305-334. Wolkomir, M. (2006). Be not deceived: The sacred and sexual struggles of gay and ex-gay Christian men. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Yip, A. K. T. (1994, June 23). The study of Lesbian and Gay Rights Movement within the Christian community in Britain. rattle on presented at Organizing Sexuality Confernce, University of Amsterdam. Yip, A. K. T. (1997). Attacking the assailant: Gay Christians Talk Back. The British Journal of Sociology, 48(1), 113-127.\r\n'

No comments:

Post a Comment