MormonsandGays.org is updated...

[Daniel2]

On ‎10‎/‎28‎/‎2016 at 11:54 PM, kllindley said:

The point was that previous research had been politically motivated and as a matter of public record research deemed a threat to political goals was suppressed.  It is amazing how in the last year they're had been so much "new" research on fluidity and identity vs orientation.  

I am willing to find and cite the studies I reference, but most of it can be found on the APA webpage. I have cited these sources on previous threads with you.  I don't have the time to repeat the process of me citing and then you ignoring my response and I sincerely question what good it would do. I have tried to share and explain my perspective and I truly don't feel that most in this conversation are even participating in good faith. They don't read responses or answer sincere questions.  Like I said earlier, I am generally pretty trusting, but after getting burned so many times. . . Maybe I need to learn my lesson and focus my time and efforts on more constructive conversations. 

I believe it was you who referred to the Mormon discussion 4 part podcast as a fair look at what "science" says. So I listened and even kept a list of logical errors, omitted studies, misrepresented studies, biased emotional charge words, etc.  If that is anywhere near your views, you've already made up your mind.  

I have a hard time finding any of this allegedly "new" research on "fluidity and identify vs orientation" on the APA webpage.  In fact, a quick search of the APA's website under "sexual orientation identity" reveals multiple entries that reflect that sexual orientation is unchangeable, such as:

Quote

1.Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation
The task force conducted a systematic review of the peer-reviewed journal literature on sexual orientation change efforts and concluded that efforts to change sexual orientation are unlikely to be successful and involve some risk of harm, contrary to the claims of SOCE practitioners and advocates.
Task Force Report (August 2009)

• 2.Resolution on Appropriate Affirmative Responses to Sexual Orientation Distress and Change Efforts
  The American Psychological Association concludes that there is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation.
  Council Policy (August 2009)
• 3.Resolution on Data about Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
  APA recommends that research studies, including population-based surveys, include sexual orientation as a dimension of assessment, study, and analysis where possible and appropriate.
  Council Policy (February 2016)
• 4.Resolution on Gender and Sexual Orientation Diversity in Children and Adolescents in Schools
  Same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality regardless of sexual orientation identity; and diverse gender expressions, regardless of gender identity, and diverse gender identities, beyond a binary classification, are normal and positive variations of the human experience.
  Council Policy (February 2015)
• 5.Chapter XII: Public Interest (Part 2)
  Current Public Interest policies of the American Psychological Association, on subjects such as disabilities, gender identity, sexual orientation, antisemitism, obesity and ethnic minorities.
  Council Policy
• 6.Guidelines for Psychological Practice with Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Clients
  These guidelines provide practitioners with a frame of reference for the treatment of lesbian, gay and bisexual clients, and basic information and further references in the areas of assessment, intervention, identity, relationships and the education and training of psychologists.
  Guidelines (February 2011)
• 7.Insufficient evidence to support sexual orientation change efforts
  Mental health professionals should avoid telling clients they can change their sexual orientation through therapy or other treatments, according to a resolution adopted by the APA's Council of Representatives on Aug. 5 during APA's 2009 Annual Convention.
  Magazine Article (October 2009)
• 8.Handbook of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity in Counseling and Psychotherapy
  This volume examines the diverse body of scholarship and research on sexual minority, transgender, and gender non-conforming psychology, and describes how practitioners can provide clients with flexible and affirmative mental health services.
  Book/Monograph (September 2016)
• 9.Safe and Welcoming Schools for LGBT Youth[PDF]
  Research on LGBTQQ adolescent development, risk and resiliency across school settings and how to develop students, families and school personnel can create safer schools.
  Brochure/Pamphlet

You say you "have cited these sources on previous threads" with me, and question whether I participate in these discussions "in good faith."  I don't recall seeing you post any such references before, but I apologize if you feel that I have left any such posts intentionally unanswered... Although real life occasionally prevents me from checking in on a daily basis, I DO try to get back to the threads that I've participated in.  I'd be happy to read your sources from the APA saying otherwise... or at least clarifying where/how we may be misunderstanding one another.

Yes, it was me that shared links to the podcasts by BYU professor Bill Bradshaw reviewing much of the studies regarding the unchangeable nature of sexual orientation.  I'd love to read your list of what he got wrong--I don't recall you sharing that before, either.  Again, if you did, I missed it, and I apologize.

It seems that with the new website (as well as some previous past sources), the church is now on record as saying that most gays and lesbians and individuals who experience SSA cannot change their sexual orientation, and several apostles have acknowledged that there are at least some physiological aspects involved in determining sexual orientation.  Are you saying you disagree with that stance....?

Edited October 31, 2016 by Daniel2

[Daniel2]

On ‎10‎/‎29‎/‎2016 at 11:47 AM, Scott Lloyd said:

Why do you limit your allowance to those who are "in the Church" and "trying to be celibate and active in the Church"?

You seem by implication to reject any possibility that there are non-Mormons with same-sex attraction who reject the gay or lesbian label for themselves because of the associated connotation. And why would they have to be "trying to be celibate"? One of the important messages from gayandmormon.org and other content provided by the Church is that there are varied conditions and that some who experience same-sex attraction also have hetero-sexual attraction, conceivably to the point that they could build a fulfilling marriage and have a family based on such attraction.

I think your post above illustrates the limitations of using the term "experiencing SSA," because using such a blanket/generic term fails to offer any meaningful difference between those who experience attractions only to those of the same or opposite sex, vs. those who experience attractions to both.

Saying "I have same-sex attraction" doesn't really identify whether one is gay or bisexual.

And there is a HUGE difference between what may be possible/realistic/healthy for one vs. impossible/unrealistic/unhealthy for the other.

Using the terms "gay," "bisexual," or "straight" is more precise and allows for a greater understanding and accuracy of what an individual is able to experience.

Even so, as I've said previously, I always attempt to use the term "SSA" when speaking of/to someone who self-identifies according to that label.

And in all my experience, yes, the only people who use the term "SSA" are conservative religions or proponents of reparative/conversion therapy who believe it's a condition that is temporary or changeable.  I am unfamiliar with any mainstream professional organization that uses the term.

 

[Daniel2]

On ‎10‎/‎29‎/‎2016 at 10:23 PM, kllindley said:

Given the data on sexual attraction, orientation, behavior, and identity, (and the fluidity of each of those!), it really is sad to see people clinging so tightly to a false narrative that they have repeated so many times, they believe is true.  

Here's this claim again, kllindley... Please, provide some citations for these claims of all this "data" that sexual orientation is fluid.

Thanks,

Daniel

Edited October 31, 2016 by Daniel2

[HappyJackWagon]

FYI- for those who are interested, there have been a couple of interesting podcasts about the changes to the website.

http://www.athoughtfulfaith.org/mormon-and-gay-a-response-to-the-new-lds-website/   At the 1:07:30 mark there's a discussion about use of SSA and it's acceptance in the field of mental health.

The Mormon Matters podcast was also good. http://www.mormonmatters.org/2016/10/25/350-the-lds-churchs-new-mormon-and-gay-website/

[Scott Lloyd]

21 hours ago, Daniel2 said:

In answer to the above, Scott, several of us have said that we are happy to use the term "SSA" when referring to individuals who use it to self-identify, while asking for the same consideration, in return.  My earlier post on page two of this thread said as much:

"From my perspective so far as minimizing an "us vs. them" mentality when it comes to what we call one another, the most inclusive stance is to acknowledge and respect the labels that each one of us chooses as important and valuable for ourselves.  That's why, when I meet someone who self identifies by saying "I have SSA," that's the term I use when discussing their sexual attractions/identity with them, regardless of my own feelings on the matter.  I appreciate it when others do the same with me.  To me, that's the inclusive 'win/win.' "

 

 

I don't see same-sex attraction as an identity label so much as a technical description of a feeling. Nor do I see it as inherently promoting an "us vs. them" mentality.

In the neighborhood where I grew up, it was common among some of the less-enlightened folk to refer to anyone hailing from south of the Rio Grande as Mexican, regardless of whether the person was actually from Mexico. 

Later the term chicano came into vogue, but it too was sometimes used inaccurately, as it denotes someone from Mexico or of Mexican descent. 

These days, it is standard to use the term Hispanic or Latino/Latina. Much better as an all-inclusive descriptor, because it does not denote or connote a subset of the population.

It's the same with same-sex attraction. It can be used generically without incorrectly implying that everyone referred to acts on that attraction.

 

Quote

I echo BlueDream's similar approach earlier on this same page. ....

BlueDreams is entitled to her opinion, just as I am entitled to disagree with it.

 

Edited November 1, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[kllindley]

8 hours ago, Daniel2 said:

Here's this claim again, kllindley... Please, provide some citations for these claims of all this "data" that sexual orientation is fluid.

Thanks,

Daniel

i have not argued that sexual orientation can be changed by therapy or any other intervention, only that it can change.  

 

Quote

Sexual orientation refers to the sex of those to whom one is sexually and romantically attracted. Categories of sexual orientation typically have included attraction to members of one's own sex (gay men or lesbians), attraction to members of the other sex (heterosexuals), and attraction to members of both sexes (bisexuals). Some people identify as pansexual or queer in terms of their sexual orientation, which means they define their sexual orientation outside of the gender binary of "male" and "female" only. While these categories continue to be widely used, research has suggested that sexual orientation does not always appear in such definable categories and instead occurs on a continuum (Kinsey, Pomeroy, Martin, & Gebhard, 1953; Klein, 1993; Klein, Sepekoff, & Wolff, 1985; Shively & DeCecco, 1977). In addition, some research indicates that sexual orientation is fluid for some people; this may be especially true for women (e.g., Diamond, 2007; Golden, 1987; Peplau & Garnets, 2000).

American Psychological Association & National Association of School Psychologists. (2015). Resolution on gender and sexual orientation diversity in children and adolescents in schools. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/about/polic y/orientation-diversity.aspx

 

Notice how they differentiate between attraction and "categories"  

 

Also some additional studies and citations:

Quote

This tends to provide a fascinating picture of sexuality – for example, while only only 1.6 percent of people identify as LGB when given strict labels to choose from, almost half of young people don’t identify as exclusively straight when asked to plot their sexuality on the Kinsey scale

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/10/07/see-where-you-are-on-the-new-scale-of-sexuality/

 

Copen, C. E., Chandra, A., & Febo-Vazquez, I. (2016, January). Sexual behavior, sexual attraction, and sexual orientation among adults aged 18-44 in the United States: Data from the 2011-2013 National Survey of Family Growth. National Health Statistics Reports, Number 88. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Lindley, L. L., Walsemann, K. M., & Carter, J. W., Jr. (2012). The association of sexual orientation measures with young adults’ health-related outcomes. American Journal of Public Health, 102, 1177–1185. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300262  (Not me or a relative

Li, G., & Hines, M. (online). In search of emerging same-sex sexuality: Romantic attractions at age 13 years. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi: 10.1007/s10508-016-0726-2

Savin-Williams, R. C. (2014). An exploratory study of the categorical versus spectrum nature of sexual orientation. Journal of Sex Research, 51, 446–453. doi: 10.1007/s10508-013-0219-5

Diamond, L. M. (2008). Sexual fluidity: Understanding women’s love and desire.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Savin-Williams, R. C., & Vrangalova, Z. (2013). Mostly heterosexual as a distinct sexual orientation group: A systematic review of the empirical evidence. Developmental Review, 33, 58-88. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2013.01.001

Rosario, M., Reisner, S. L., Corliss, H. L., Wypij, D., Frazier, A. L., & Austin, S. B. (2014). Disparities in depressive distress by sexual orientation in emerging adults: The roles of attachment and stress paradigms. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 901–916. doi 10.1007/s10508-013-0129-6 

Morales Knight, Luis F., "Dimensions of Individuals' Judgements about Sexual Attraction, Romantic Attachment, and Sexual Orientation" (2012). Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research: Department of Psychology. Paper 43. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/psychdiss/43

Donovan, James M., "Review: If You Seduce a Straight Person, Can You Make Them Gay?: Issues in Biological Essentialism Versus Social Constructionism in Gay and Lesbian Identities ( John P. DeCecco and John P. Elia, Harrington Park, 1993)" (1994). Law Faculty Scholarly Articles. Paper 456. http://uknowledge.uky.edu/law_facpub/456

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-sexuality-and-romance/201608/stephanie-bisexual-orientation-lesbian-identity

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-sexuality-and-romance/201606/gay-not-gay-straight-not-straight

http://www.joekort.com/blog/2016/The-Difference-Between-Sexual-Orientation-and-Erotic-Orientation

http://www.joekort.com/blog/2014/Male-Sexual-Fludity

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/understanding-the-erotic-code/201604/can-someone-be-homosexual-and-not-gay

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-sexuality-and-romance/201607/bisexual-not-bisexual

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-sexuality-and-romance/201609/how-many-gay-men-are-there-fewer-you-might-think

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/standard-deviations/201605/sexuality-is-much-more-fluid-you-think

And more!!!

Phillips, Daleana, "Constructing Definitions of Sexual Orientation in Research and Theory." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2007.
http://scholarworks.gsu.edu/sociology_theses/19

http://www.academia.edu/11415401/Beyond_Sexual_Orientation_Integrating_Gender_Sex_and_Diverse_Sexualities_via_Sexual_Configurations_Theory

http://www.scienceofrelationships.com/home/2014/10/13/debunking-myths-about-sexual-fluidity.html

Articulating Sexuality A Critical History of Gay and Lesbian Anthropology http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1083&context=socssp

Sexual Identities, What Are They Made Of? https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00369324/document

THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL CONTEXT ON THE CONCEPTUALIZATION OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION: A CONSTRUCT VALIDITY INVESTIGATION  https://etd.ohiolink.edu/rws_etd/document/get/osu1153031007/inline

https://thethinkingasexual.wordpress.com/identity-attraction-relationship-terms/

 

[kllindley]

8 hours ago, Daniel2 said:

Yes, it was me that shared links to the podcasts by BYU professor Bill Bradshaw reviewing much of the studies regarding the unchangeable nature of sexual orientation.  I'd love to read your list of what he got wrong--I don't recall you sharing that before, either.  Again, if you did, I missed it, and I apologize.

Didn't post it because it got so long. 

 

8 hours ago, Daniel2 said:

It seems that with the new website (as well as some previous past sources), the church is now on record as saying that most gays and lesbians and individuals who experience SSA cannot change their sexual orientation, and several apostles have acknowledged that there are at least some physiological aspects involved in determining sexual orientation.  Are you saying you disagree with that stance....?

Not at all.  I'm stating that from a social constructionist standpoint, even if the orientation never changes how one chooses to identify and what that identity means can vary greatly depending on the social context and other intersectionalities.  Do you disagree?

8 hours ago, Daniel2 said:

Saying "I have same-sex attraction" doesn't really identify whether one is gay or bisexual.

And there is a HUGE difference between what may be possible/realistic/healthy for one vs. impossible/unrealistic/unhealthy for the other.

I think we agree very much on this point.  What I emphasize is that often youth are told that if they are attracted to the same-sex they are gay or lesbian.  And there are assumptions and baggage that come with those terms.  I advocate using more accurate descriptive language that allows for people to accept degrees of bisexuality.  

Quote

Previous social and behavioral research on identity among bisexual men, when not subsumed within the category of men who have sex with men (MSM), has primarily focused on samples of self-identified bisexual men. Little is known about sexual self-identification among men who are behaviorally bisexual, regardless of sexual identity. Using qualitative data from 77 in-depth interviews with a diverse sample of behaviorally bisexual men (i.e., men who have had sex with at least one woman and at least one man in the past six months) from a large city in the Midwestern United States, we analyzed responses from a domain focusing on sexual self-identity and related issues. Overall, participants’ sexual self-identification was exceptionally diverse. Three primary themes emerged: (1) a resistance to, or rejection of, using sexual self-identity labels; (2) concurrent use of multiple identity categories and the strategic deployment of multiple sexual identity labels; and (3) a variety of trajectories to current sexual self-identification. Based on our findings, we offer insights into the unique lived experiences of behaviorally bisexual men, as well as broader considerations for the study of men’s sexuality. We also explore identity-related information useful for the design of HIV/STI prevention and other sexual health programs directed toward behaviorally bisexual men, which will ideally be variable and flexible in accordance with the wide range of diversity found in this population.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4409915/

 

[kllindley]

And this new research!

http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/24/beyond-gay-straight-sexual-orientation

But seriously some of this new stuff is really, really good:

Quote

 

Ongoing political controversies around the world exemplify a long-standing and widespread preoccupation with the acceptability of homosexuality. Nonheterosexual people have seen dramatic surges both in their rights and in positive public opinion in many Western countries. In contrast, in much of Africa, the Middle East, the Caribbean, Oceania, and parts of Asia, homosexual behavior remains illegal and severely punishable, with some countries retaining the death penalty for it. Political controversies about sexual orientation have often overlapped with scientific controversies. That is, participants on both sides of the sociopolitical debates have tended to believe that scientific findings—and scientific truths—about sexual orientation matter a great deal in making political decisions. The most contentious scientific issues have concerned the causes of sexual orientation—that is, why are some people heterosexual, others bisexual, and others homosexual? The actual relevance of these issues to social, political, and ethical decisions is often poorly justified, however.

http://psi.sagepub.com/content/17/2/45.short

 

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-life-the-american-male/201601/male-bisexuality-current-research-findings

 

Quote

 

http://drrobertepstein.com/downloads/EPSTEIN_2016-Do_Gays_Have_a_Choice-Revision_for_special_issue_of_SCIENTIFIC_AMERICAN-March_2016.pdf?lbisphpreq=1

Major findings of the study:
 
1)  Sexual orientation is not properly described by two or three category labels; rather, as Kinsey asserted nearly a century ago, sexual orientation exists smoothly on a continuum.  It's more like height than eye color.  Forcing people to adopt simplistic labels causes many people great distress, because there is necessarily a disconnect between the label they adopt and their actual sexual behaviors, fantasies, and attractions.  The new study quantifies the disconnect, which is substantial, and it also confirms that the greater the disconnect, the more stress anxiety people feel about their sexual orientation.
 
2)  Few people - possibly even less than 10 percent of the population - are exclusively straight or gay throughout their lives.  Most people experience some degree of same-sex attraction at some point.  In a society that was completely free of sexual orientation stigma, most people would probably be bisexual, as Freud suggested a century ago.
 
3)  People differ not only in where their interests anchor on the Sexual Orientation Continuum - their "Mean Sexual Orientation" (MSO) - but also in their "Sexual Orientation Range" (SOR) - roughly, how much flexibility they have in expressing their sexual orientation.  Some people have a wide SOR, some a very narrow SOR.  This goes to the heart of the debate about how much "choice" people have in expressing sexual orientation - and about how far someone can go in altering his or her sexual orientation.  The new study quantifies SOR and shows how it differs by demographic category.

 

Quote

 

In a study with 17,785 subjects obtained over the Internet from the United States and 47 other countries, Kinsey’s hypothesis that sexual orientation lies on a continuum was supported. Self-identifications of subjects as gay, straight, bisexual, and other corresponded to broad, skewed distributions, suggesting that such terms are misleading for many people. Sexual orientation range—roughly, how much flexibility someone has in expressing sexual orientation—was also measured. The results support a fluid-continuum model of sexual orientation, according to which genetic and environmental factors determine both the size of the sexual orientation range and the point at which an individual’s sexual orientation is centered on the continuum

http://drrobertepstein.com/downloads/EPSTEIN_et_al-2012-Journal_of_Homosexuality-Support_for_Fluid-Continuum_Model-FINAL.pdf?lbisphpreq=1

 

The last admittedly not so new 

Edited November 1, 2016 by kllindley

[Scott Lloyd]

20 hours ago, Daniel2 said:

I think your post above illustrates the limitations of using the term "experiencing SSA," because using such a blanket/generic term fails to offer any meaningful difference between those who experience attractions only to those of the same or opposite sex, vs. those who experience attractions to both.

Saying "I have same-sex attraction" doesn't really identify whether one is gay or bisexual.

And there is a HUGE difference between what may be possible/realistic/healthy for one vs. impossible/unrealistic/unhealthy for the other.

Using the terms "gay," "bisexual," or "straight" is more precise and allows for a greater understanding and accuracy of what an individual is able to experience.

Even so, as I've said previously, I always attempt to use the term "SSA" when speaking of/to someone who self-identifies according to that label.

And in all my experience, yes, the only people who use the term "SSA" are conservative religions or proponents of reparative/conversion therapy who believe it's a condition that is temporary or changeable.  I am unfamiliar with any mainstream professional organization that uses the term.

 

When it's a matter of referring only to those who are homosexually active, I'm not at all opposed to using gay or lesbian or whatever personal identifier is preferred (within reason, of course; I would eschew vulgarity in any context).

Also, when occasion calls for it, I'm not opposed to using more precise terms, such as bisexual.

I would use same-sex attraction as a generic descriptor because it does not necessarily imply active involvement in a lifestyle the way terms such as gay and lesbian are widely regarded as doing, although it could include those who are so involved. The case for using gay as a generic descriptor is no more just than the case for using SSA.

 

Edited November 1, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Daniel2]

33 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

When it's a matter of referring only to those who are homosexually active, I'm not at all opposed to using gay or lesbian or whatever personal identifier is preferred (within reason, of course; I would eschew vulgarity in any context).

Also, when occasion calls for it, I'm not opposed to using more precise terms, such as bisexual.

I would use same-sex attraction as a generic descriptor because it does not necessarily imply active involvement in a lifestyle the way terms such as gay and lesbian are widely regarded as doing, although it could include those who are so involved. The case for using gay as a generic descriptor is no more just than the case for using SSA.

 

I appreciate that you aren't opposed to using the term "gay" or "lesbian" for individuals who so self-identify that are "homosexually active."  I think that's a healthy and respectful approach, just as it is to use "SSA" when referring to those who so self-identify.

By way of clarification: in addition to individuals who are "homosexually active" that use "gay" or "lesbian," there are several individuals on the new church website who self-identify using the term "gay" who are not sexually active.  It appears to me that such individuals are using the term to suggest something beyond sexual activity, given that they have chosen to strive for celibacy, despite their acknowledgement/self-identification as 'gay' or 'lesbian.'  Are you equally open to using 'gay' or 'lesbian' in such scenarios when active and devout Latter-day Saints prefer to so self-designate, as well?

In other words, in my experience, many of us who are gay or lesbian self-identify as gay or lesbian, regardless of whether or not we are currently pursuing or actively involved in any type of romantic relationship or sexual activity.  Incidentally, the same thing is true of virtually all of my 'straight' friends who aren't currently involved in romantic relationships/sexual activities; none of them refer to themselves as individuals who 'experience' or 'struggle' with 'opposite-sex attraction' or 'OSA.'  Whether or not they're "heterosexually active," most would find it odd to not self-identify simply as 'straight.'

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Daniel2 said:

I appreciate that you aren't opposed to using the term "gay" or "lesbian" for individuals who so self-identify that are "homosexually active."  I think that's a healthy and respectful approach, just as it is to use "SSA" when referring to those who so self-identify.

By way of clarification: in addition to individuals who are "homosexually active" that use "gay" or "lesbian," there are several individuals on the new church website who self-identify using the term "gay" who are not sexually active.  It appears to me that such individuals are using the term to suggest something beyond sexual activity, given that they have chosen to strive for celibacy, despite their acknowledgement/self-identification as 'gay' or 'lesbian.'  Are you equally open to using 'gay' or 'lesbian' in such scenarios when active and devout Latter-day Saints prefer to so self-designate, as well?

In other words, in my experience, many of us who are gay or lesbian self-identify as gay or lesbian, regardless of whether or not we are currently pursuing or actively involved in any type of romantic relationship or sexual activity.  Incidentally, the same thing is true of virtually all of my 'straight' friends who aren't currently involved in romantic relationships/sexual activities; none of them refer to themselves as individuals who 'experience' or 'struggle' with 'opposite-sex attraction' or 'OSA.'  Whether or not they're "heterosexually active," most would find it odd to not self-identify simply as 'straight.'

Heh, if you want to refer to me as being "heterosexually active" or having "opposite-sex attraction," be my guest. I won't object at all.

I have to say, though, that I don't readily see the utility of it, as heterosexuality is very much the norm.

Quote

By way of clarification: in addition to individuals who are "homosexually active" that use "gay" or "lesbian," there are several individuals on the new church website who self-identify using the term "gay" who are not sexually active.  It appears to me that such individuals are using the term to suggest something beyond sexual activity, given that they have chosen to strive for celibacy, despite their acknowledgement/self-identification as 'gay' or 'lesbian.'  Are you equally open to using 'gay' or 'lesbian' in such scenarios when active and devout Latter-day Saints prefer to so self-designate, as well?

Yes, on a case-by-case basis. Such individuals are, no doubt, dialed in to the popular vernacular. But not everyone is, and my concern is for those who are not. Moreover, I don't know whether those individuals you refer to would object to the same-sex attraction term. They might like it better than gay or lesbian.

It's my recollection that this whole dispute (and it pre-dates this thread) started with objection to or contempt for any use at all of the term same-sex attraction.

I think the new gayandmormon.org site gives good rationale (as already quoted on this thread) for using the term

Edited November 1, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Daniel2]

12 hours ago, kllindley said:

i have not argued that sexual orientation can be changed by therapy or any other intervention, only that it can change.  

 

American Psychological Association & National Association of School Psychologists. (2015). Resolution on gender and sexual orientation diversity in children and adolescents in schools. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/about/polic y/orientation-diversity.aspx

13 hours ago, kllindley said:

i have not argued that sexual orientation can be changed by therapy or any other intervention, only that it can change.  

 

American Psychological Association & National Association of School Psychologists. (2015). Resolution on gender and sexual orientation diversity in children and adolescents in schools. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/about/polic y/orientation-diversity.aspx

 

Notice how they differentiate between attraction and "categories"  

 

Also some additional studies and citations:

 

Copen, C. E., Chandra, A., & Febo-Vazquez, I. (2016, January). Sexual behavior, sexual attraction, and sexual orientation among adults aged 18-44 in the United States: Data from the 2011-2013 National Survey of Family Growth. National Health Statistics Reports, Number 88. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Lindley, L. L., Walsemann, K. M., & Carter, J. W., Jr. (2012). The association of sexual orientation measures with young adults’ health-related outcomes. American Journal of Public Health, 102, 1177–1185. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300262  (Not me or a relative

Li, G., & Hines, M. (online). In search of emerging same-sex sexuality: Romantic attractions at age 13 years. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi: 10.1007/s10508-016-0726-2

Savin-Williams, R. C. (2014). An exploratory study of the categorical versus spectrum nature of sexual orientation. Journal of Sex Research, 51, 446–453. doi: 10.1007/s10508-013-0219-5

Diamond, L. M. (2008). Sexual fluidity: Understanding women’s love and desire.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Savin-Williams, R. C., & Vrangalova, Z. (2013). Mostly heterosexual as a distinct sexual orientation group: A systematic review of the empirical evidence. Developmental Review, 33, 58-88. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2013.01.001

Rosario, M., Reisner, S. L., Corliss, H. L., Wypij, D., Frazier, A. L., & Austin, S. B. (2014). Disparities in depressive distress by sexual orientation in emerging adults: The roles of attachment and stress paradigms. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 901–916. doi 10.1007/s10508-013-0129-6 

Morales Knight, Luis F., "Dimensions of Individuals' Judgements about Sexual Attraction, Romantic Attachment, and Sexual Orientation" (2012). Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research: Department of Psychology. Paper 43. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/psychdiss/43

Donovan, James M., "Review: If You Seduce a Straight Person, Can You Make Them Gay?: Issues in Biological Essentialism Versus Social Constructionism in Gay and Lesbian Identities ( John P. DeCecco and John P. Elia, Harrington Park, 1993)" (1994). Law Faculty Scholarly Articles. Paper 456. http://uknowledge.uky.edu/law_facpub/456

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-sexuality-and-romance/201608/stephanie-bisexual-orientation-lesbian-identity

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-sexuality-and-romance/201606/gay-not-gay-straight-not-straight

http://www.joekort.com/blog/2016/The-Difference-Between-Sexual-Orientation-and-Erotic-Orientation

http://www.joekort.com/blog/2014/Male-Sexual-Fludity

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/understanding-the-erotic-code/201604/can-someone-be-homosexual-and-not-gay

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-sexuality-and-romance/201607/bisexual-not-bisexual

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-sexuality-and-romance/201609/how-many-gay-men-are-there-fewer-you-might-think

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/standard-deviations/201605/sexuality-is-much-more-fluid-you-think

And more!!!

Phillips, Daleana, "Constructing Definitions of Sexual Orientation in Research and Theory." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2007.
http://scholarworks.gsu.edu/sociology_theses/19

http://www.academia.edu/11415401/Beyond_Sexual_Orientation_Integrating_Gender_Sex_and_Diverse_Sexualities_via_Sexual_Configurations_Theory

http://www.scienceofrelationships.com/home/2014/10/13/debunking-myths-about-sexual-fluidity.html

Articulating Sexuality A Critical History of Gay and Lesbian Anthropology http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1083&context=socssp

Sexual Identities, What Are They Made Of? https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00369324/document

THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL CONTEXT ON THE CONCEPTUALIZATION OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION: A CONSTRUCT VALIDITY INVESTIGATION  https://etd.ohiolink.edu/rws_etd/document/get/osu1153031007/inline

https://thethinkingasexual.wordpress.com/identity-attraction-relationship-terms/

 

Notice how they differentiate between attraction and "categories"  

 

Also some additional studies and citations:

 

Copen, C. E., Chandra, A., & Febo-Vazquez, I. (2016, January). Sexual behavior, sexual attraction, and sexual orientation among adults aged 18-44 in the United States: Data from the 2011-2013 National Survey of Family Growth. National Health Statistics Reports, Number 88. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Lindley, L. L., Walsemann, K. M., & Carter, J. W., Jr. (2012). The association of sexual orientation measures with young adults’ health-related outcomes. American Journal of Public Health, 102, 1177–1185. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300262  (Not me or a relative

Li, G., & Hines, M. (online). In search of emerging same-sex sexuality: Romantic attractions at age 13 years. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi: 10.1007/s10508-016-0726-2

Savin-Williams, R. C. (2014). An exploratory study of the categorical versus spectrum nature of sexual orientation. Journal of Sex Research, 51, 446–453. doi: 10.1007/s10508-013-0219-5

Diamond, L. M. (2008). Sexual fluidity: Understanding women’s love and desire.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Savin-Williams, R. C., & Vrangalova, Z. (2013). Mostly heterosexual as a distinct sexual orientation group: A systematic review of the empirical evidence. Developmental Review, 33, 58-88. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2013.01.001

Rosario, M., Reisner, S. L., Corliss, H. L., Wypij, D., Frazier, A. L., & Austin, S. B. (2014). Disparities in depressive distress by sexual orientation in emerging adults: The roles of attachment and stress paradigms. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 901–916. doi 10.1007/s10508-013-0129-6 

Morales Knight, Luis F., "Dimensions of Individuals' Judgements about Sexual Attraction, Romantic Attachment, and Sexual Orientation" (2012). Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research: Department of Psychology. Paper 43. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/psychdiss/43

Donovan, James M., "Review: If You Seduce a Straight Person, Can You Make Them Gay?: Issues in Biological Essentialism Versus Social Constructionism in Gay and Lesbian Identities ( John P. DeCecco and John P. Elia, Harrington Park, 1993)" (1994). Law Faculty Scholarly Articles. Paper 456. http://uknowledge.uky.edu/law_facpub/456

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-sexuality-and-romance/201608/stephanie-bisexual-orientation-lesbian-identity

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-sexuality-and-romance/201606/gay-not-gay-straight-not-straight

http://www.joekort.com/blog/2016/The-Difference-Between-Sexual-Orientation-and-Erotic-Orientation

http://www.joekort.com/blog/2014/Male-Sexual-Fludity

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/understanding-the-erotic-code/201604/can-someone-be-homosexual-and-not-gay

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-sexuality-and-romance/201607/bisexual-not-bisexual

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-sexuality-and-romance/201609/how-many-gay-men-are-there-fewer-you-might-think

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/standard-deviations/201605/sexuality-is-much-more-fluid-you-think

And more!!!

Phillips, Daleana, "Constructing Definitions of Sexual Orientation in Research and Theory." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2007.
http://scholarworks.gsu.edu/sociology_theses/19

http://www.academia.edu/11415401/Beyond_Sexual_Orientation_Integrating_Gender_Sex_and_Diverse_Sexualities_via_Sexual_Configurations_Theory

http://www.scienceofrelationships.com/home/2014/10/13/debunking-myths-about-sexual-fluidity.html

Articulating Sexuality A Critical History of Gay and Lesbian Anthropology http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1083&context=socssp

Sexual Identities, What Are They Made Of? https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00369324/document

THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL CONTEXT ON THE CONCEPTUALIZATION OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION: A CONSTRUCT VALIDITY INVESTIGATION  https://etd.ohiolink.edu/rws_etd/document/get/osu1153031007/inline

https://thethinkingasexual.wordpress.com/identity-attraction-relationship-terms/

 

 

Hi, Kllindley,

There is a lot that you’ve posted here in response to my request for you to provide sources for your claims that “sexual orientation is fluid.”  While I appreciate your response, the way it’s listed is somewhat overwhelming to take in, in its entirety, without specific quotations or comments as to how you feel it supports your position.  As I’ve reflected on how best to respond, I think it’s clear that perhaps we need to divide what you’ve shared into smaller bytes… portions that we’re able to discuss, to better understand one another’s position on the topic.

That being said, I had a couple of other thoughts that occurred to me as I browsed some of the links you shared as well as some of your comments in between that I think might be helpful to share to give you context on where I’m coming from.

1. I think it’s always helpful to clearly (albeit as simply as possible) articulate the point that any of us is trying to explore, defend, or advocate on behalf of.  I’m not sure that either of us has done so, which may be why I feel as though listing all the references you’ve provided hasn’t added clarity in my mind as to what you’re suggesting.  So, in the spirit of trying to be specific, I’ll try and add more relevance to my point, with an invitation for you to do likewise, so that we can then delve into the sources you listed to see how they relate to the point you’re attempting to make…

2.  What I’ve asked for clarification on and references for is the suggestion that “recent research (after the passage of marriage equality) now indicates that sexual orientation is fluid,” at least, in so far as that phrase is intended to suggest or is proposed to mean that ‘now that marriage equality has been achieved, studies are now willing to admit that sexual orientation can change.’

3.  In so doing, my use of the term ‘sexual orientation’ is the same as that contained in the “Guidelines for psychological practice with lesbian, gay, and bisexual clients” section of the Definitions Related to Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity in APA Guidelines and Policy Documents, which define sexual orientation this way:   “Sexual orientation refers to the sex of those to whom one is sexually and romantically attracted. Categories of sexual orientation typically have included attraction to members of one’s own sex (gay men or lesbians), attraction to members of the other sex (heterosexuals), and attraction to members of both sexes (bisexuals). While these categories continue to be widely used, research has suggested that sexual orientation does not always appear in such definable categories and instead occurs on a continuum (e.g., Kinsey, Pomeroy, Martin, & Gebhard, 1953; Klein, 1993; Klein, Sepekoff, & Wolff, 1985; Shiveley & DeCecco, 1977) In addition, some research indicates that sexual orientation is fluid for some people; this may be especially true for women (e.g., Diamond, 2007; Golden, 1987; Peplau & Garnets, 2000).”

4.  You’ll note that the last sentence of the paragraph above acknowledges that “some research indicates that sexual orientation is fluid for some people,” and notes that that “may especially be true for women,” but the three references therein all pre-date marriage equality, and emphasize that such is especially true of women.

5.  Based on my own personal experience and experiences in discussing sexual orientation with other men (straight, gay, and bisexual) and women across the spectrum of sexual orientation (both which obviously inform my own beliefs on the subject), I find it very true that women tend to be more sexually fluid than men, and that the category of “homosexual” and “heterosexual” tend to be more rigidly defined and unchangeable with regards to men rather than women.

6.  I have said before that any given individual’s sexual behavior may or may not be an expression of any given individual’s innate sexual orientation.  Individuals don’t always choose to engage in sexual activities to which they are inherently attracted to (celibacy is the most extreme example of this, but so is respectful modesty in any modern society… We almost take it for granted in modern society that no one is given free rein to go around and simply grab whomever they’re attracted to and force them to engage in sexual activities).  And sometimes individuals choose to engage in sexual behaviors to which they aren’t attracted to (these may range from mixed-orientation marriages due to religious convictions to heterosexual men engaging in homosexual behaviors due to being in populations where there’s a scarcity of the opposite sex).  Just because a man has had sex with a man doesn’t mean he’s gay, or even bisexual, depending on the circumstances.  And just because a man has sex with a woman doesn’t mean he’s straight, or even bisexual, depending on the circumstances.  Accordingly, sexual behavior isn’t always the determinative indicator of an individual’s sexual orientation.

7.  Some of your sources speak of the fluidity of sexual orientation in terms of a different set of ranges of other physical characteristics—aside from and unrelated to gender—to which individuals may be attracted (age, race, body type/size, eye color, muscle mass, hair/body hair, individual looks/characteristics, etc.)  While these other types of physical characteristics that vary from person to person and even culture to culture may change over time, they’re really beyond the scope of what I’m focused on and concerned about, which is sexual orientation as it relates to gender.  That goes back to the definition of sexual orientation I referenced in the “Guidelines for psychological practice with lesbian, gay, and bisexual clients” that “Sexual orientation refers to the sex of those to whom one is sexually and romantically attracted. Categories of sexual orientation typically have included attraction to members of one’s own sex (gay men or lesbians), attraction to members of the other sex (heterosexuals), and attraction to members of both sexes (bisexuals).”  In other words, what I’m saying is that any of your references that speak of the fluidity of sexual orientation in terms of characteristics other than gender really aren’t related to the point I’m trying to discuss. 

8.  I also want to make one thing clear (and I’m speaking generally to here, not just to you, Kllindley): I believe it’s NEVER helpful to try to misrepresent the views of those who may hold different opinions than myself, nor to attempt to personally attack anyone as a means of ending dialogue.  I believe it’s always in the best interests of having informed and productive discussion to strive to understand and accurately respond to the actual points of one’s “opponent” (although I use that term without mal intent, despite its oppositional implication).

So, Kllindley… with all of the above in mind, as I’ve browsed through your list sources…  Is there any aspect of what I’ve said about my approach that you’d like to discuss in a more focused fashion, either as it relates to one/some of your sources? 

[Daniel2]

13 hours ago, kllindley said:

And this new research!

http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/24/beyond-gay-straight-sexual-orientation

But seriously some of this new stuff is really, really good:

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-life-the-american-male/201601/male-bisexuality-current-research-findings

 

The last admittedly not so new 

This post is what I was referring to when I said it's unrelated to the topic I feel we're discussing.  Regardless of the author's attempt to frame the discussion by his title of "Beyond Gay and Straight," (which are related to gender) the content of his article is actually attempting to 'reframe' a discussion about 'sexual orientation by introducing alternative sexual attractions based on age or abnormal sexual attractions that are extreme/dangerous/predatory (paraphilias) that are separate and distinct from 'sexual orientation' (which refers to attractions related to gender), as far as the APA definition goes.  Again, not really within the scope of what I feel is relevant to the points I'm concerned about.

However, even he concludes his article in the last paragraph by acknowledging the differences in what he's discussing vs. sexual orientation based on gender by saying.. 

"Unlike sexual orientation for gender, where most people are exclusively heterosexual, with decreasing numbers of individuals showing some same-sex interest from predominantly heterosexual to exclusively homosexual...

[Daniel2]

13 hours ago, kllindley said:

But seriously some of this new stuff is really, really good:

That is, participants on both sides of the sociopolitical debates have tended to believe that scientific findings—and scientific truths—about sexual orientation matter a great deal in making political decisions. The most contentious scientific issues have concerned the causes of sexual orientation—that is, why are some people heterosexual, others bisexual, and others homosexual? The actual relevance of these issues to social, political, and ethical decisions is often poorly justified, however.

I wanted to respond, directly, to the portion quoted above.

I emphatically agree that it's unfortunate that people are more prone to accept equal civil rights for members of the LGBTQ community ONLY if/when they believe that science implies that sexual orientation (as related to gender/sex) is biologically-determined/innately fixed.

I do NOT personally believe that the freedoms of the constitution of The United States of America depend on a biological component.  Religion is obviously a choice.  As is one's choice of spouse.  As is one's chosen occupation... place of residence... type of family... clothes one wears... car to drive... or any other choice one makes in one's own "pursuit of happiness."

It's unfortunate that some segments of society only became more prone to accept LGBT equality based on a belief (whether true or not) that gays and lesbians "have no choice" or were merely "born that way."

So, I actually agree that "the actual relevance of these issues to social, political, and ethical decisions is often poorly justified."

And at the end of the day, I believe that marriage equality--now that it's been achieved for all members of society, whether straight, bisexual, gay, lesbian, transgender, queer, or anywhere in between on the spectrum--protects everyone, including those that wish to continue to marry in mixed-orientation marriages, as is and should be their choice.  I would be as adamantly opposed to laws prohibiting marriages between mixed-orientation couples as I am in favor of laws protecting all legally-consenting couples' right to civil marriage, and my support isn't based on biology, but the freedoms guaranteed by our constitution.

[Maestrophil]

4 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

I wanted to respond, directly, to the portion quoted above.

I emphatically agree that it's unfortunate that people are more prone to accept equal civil rights for members of the LGBTQ community ONLY if/when they believe that science implies that sexual orientation (as related to gender/sex) is biologically-determined/innately fixed.

I do NOT personally believe that the freedoms of the constitution of The United States of America depend on a biological component.  Religion is obviously a choice.  As is one's choice of spouse.  As is one's chosen occupation... place of residence... type of family... clothes one wears... car to drive... or any other choice one makes in one's own "pursuit of happiness."

It's unfortunate that some segments of society only became more prone to accept LGBT equality based on a belief (whether true or not) that gays and lesbians "have no choice" or were merely "born that way."

So, I actually agree that "the actual relevance of these issues to social, political, and ethical decisions is often poorly justified."

And at the end of the day, I believe that marriage equality--now that it's been achieved for all members of society, whether straight, bisexual, gay, lesbian, transgender, queer, or anywhere in between on the spectrum--protects everyone, including those that wish to continue to marry in mixed-orientation marriages, as is and should be their choice.  I would be as adamantly opposed to laws prohibiting marriages between mixed-orientation couples as I am in favor of laws protecting all legally-consenting couples' right to civil marriage, and my support isn't based on biology, but the freedoms guaranteed by our constitution.

Polygamy? - Just curious.

[Daniel2]

14 hours ago, kllindley said:

Not at all.  I'm stating that from a social constructionist standpoint, even if the orientation never changes how one chooses to identify and what that identity means can vary greatly depending on the social context and other intersectionalities.  Do you disagree?

I think we agree very much on this point.  What I emphasize is that often youth are told that if they are attracted to the same-sex they are gay or lesbian.  And there are assumptions and baggage that come with those terms.  I advocate using more accurate descriptive language that allows for people to accept degrees of bisexuality.  

 

I like this post because I think you're asking great questions that help us clarify one another's positions and help us better understand one another.

Yes, I fully agree that our own identities are separate and distinct from our own innate (or fluid, for some) sexual orientations, and how we self-identify can change over time depending on a variety of factors including social context and other intersectionalities.

For example, all throughout my youth and young adulthood (and until I was approximately 29 years of age), I considered myself to be straight, even though I was never attracted to women.  I had unwittingly adopted this self-identity because of the religion and social culture that I had grown up in.  I had no concept that there could be anything other than 'straight'--the idea that I could be 'gay' didn't occur to me until well into my late 20's.  I honestly believed that I was 'straight,' and told the few people I chose to confide in (two bishops, and EFY speaker, and an LDS reparative therapist conducting his research at BYU on individuals 'struggling with SSA') that I just had a 'problem' of 'same-sex attraction.'  In my case, after decades of listening to and fully adopting messages suggesting heterosexually-related courses of action (up to and including temple marriage and intimate relations with my former wife), I ultimately abandoned them because I realized they were actually were in direct conflict with my own innate sexual orientation and my wife and I were experiencing negative and profoundly damaging effects from my inability to adapt my sexual orientation to the self-identity that I had adopted.  Ultimately, after coming out to my wife and taking a year to explore the issue together with another series of LDS counselors and LDS ecclesiastical leaders, I realized that the narrative I had adopted for myself was something that was untenable both for my family and I, and choose to explore alternate explanations, self-identities and expectations that were more in alignment with my abilities and attractions and which provided a foundation for a more emotionally, spiritually, and physically healthy approach for my life.

So, I realize first hand that identity is separate and distinct from orientation, and in my case, identity was more fluid than my unchangeable and innate orientation.

Further, I realize that my experience is MINE alone, and is and should not be taken to be representative of EVERYONE else who experiences attractions to members of their own gender...  Just because I couldn't remain married to my ex-wife doesn't mean that others cannot find a fulfilling life by choosing to commit to a mixed-orientation marriage, prioritizing and feeding their religious identity more than other aspects of their personality.  And just because some individuals may experience some sexual fluidity (again, in my experience, those that are men tend to be more bisexual along the spectrum rather than exclusively homosexual; and many, many more women tend to be bisexual than either hetero- OR homo-sexual) and find a measure of peace in a mixed-orientation marriage doesn't mean that I and every other gay (or even bisexual) person can/could/should.  EACH of us should be free to pursue happiness according to the dictates of our own conscience, regardless of the direction that our compass points, within the bounds of preserving the freedoms and civil liberties of all.

Finally, for those advocating a denial of same-sex attractions, I fully understand why one would want to de-emphasize and avoid the use of the terms "gay" or "lesbian," because they are most often interpreted to be exclusive of the idea that such individuals can/could/should attempt an opposite-sex relationship.  For me, who's trajectory was the opposite direction, it was empowering and an enormous relief (both of which are even understatements, as I can emphasize them enough) to finally lay claim to a label that actually, finally FIT me!  It has been said that labels "limit" us... but as much as they can limit or exclude, labels can ALSO free us... empower us... heal us... enrich us... include us... teach us... offer us relief, understanding, and identity.  It's really all a matter of perspective, isn't it...?

Edited November 1, 2016 by Daniel2

[Daniel2]

23 minutes ago, Maestrophil said:

Polygamy? - Just curious.

Do I support polygamists' right to marry?  Absolutely, so long as legally-recognized consent (being of legal age) is given.

How does the state logistically bring that into regulation and alignment with the freedoms of equal protection (especially protecting the interests of children and former spouses when divorce, death, remarriage, or abandonment come into play)?  I'm not so sure...  There definitely needs to be some serious thought and will require some input from the best legal minds that can consider the appropriate needs of all parties involved.

[Maestrophil]

1 minute ago, Daniel2 said:

Do I support polygamists' right to marry?  Absolutely, so long as legally-recognized consent (being of legal age) is given.

How does the state logistically bring that into regulation and alignment with the freedoms of equal protection (especially protecting the interests of children and former spouses when divorce, death, remarriage, or abandonment come into play)?  I'm not so sure...  There definitely needs to be some serious thought and will require some input from the best legal minds that can consider the appropriate needs of all parties involved.

Thanks for the honest reply.  

[Daniel2]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Heh, if you want to refer to me as being "heterosexually active" or having "opposite-sex attraction," be my guest. I won't object at all.

I have to say, though, that I don't readily see the utility of it, as heterosexuality is very much the norm.

Yes, on a case-by-case basis. Such individuals are, no doubt, dialed in to the popular vernacular. But not everyone is, and my concern is for those who are not. Moreover, I don't know whether those individuals you refer to would object to the same-sex attraction term. They might like it better than gay or lesbian.

It's my recollection that this whole dispute (and it pre-dates this thread) started with objection to or contempt for any use at all of the term same-sex attraction.

I think the new gayandmormon.org site gives good rationale (as already quoted on this thread) for using the term

I agree... I appreciate that the new mormonandgay.org website gives good rationale (as already quoted on this thread) for using the term, AS WELL AS the site's willingness to acknowledge and respect those that choose to self-identify by using the term 'gay' or 'lesbian' (and even the website domain name itself).

Refreshingly (I hope), I think our views and approach are more similar than might have been apparent at first, even if we aren't entirely on the same page. 

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Daniel2 said:

I agree... I appreciate that the new mormonandgay.org website gives good rationale (as already quoted on this thread) for using the term, AS WELL AS the site's willingness to acknowledge and respect those that choose to self-identify by using the term 'gay' or 'lesbian' (and even the website domain name itself).

Refreshingly (I hope), I think our views and approach are more similar than might have been apparent at first, even if we aren't entirely on the same page. 

I do hope that's the case.

I have to say by way of explanation that I am coming to this discussion with a history of having been treated with contempt -- in one case equated with those who use disparaging and ugly racial epithets, and, more recently (on this thread) called an "a$$" -- because of my insistence that same-sex attraction is a valid and reasonable term in some usages and contexts. If I have come across as pugilistic here, it may stem to some degree from that history.

 

Edited November 1, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Daniel2 said:

Do I support polygamists' right to marry?  Absolutely, so long as legally-recognized consent (being of legal age) is given.

How does the state logistically bring that into regulation and alignment with the freedoms of equal protection (especially protecting the interests of children and former spouses when divorce, death, remarriage, or abandonment come into play)?  I'm not so sure...  There definitely needs to be some serious thought and will require some input from the best legal minds that can consider the appropriate needs of all parties involved.

Interestingly according to what I hear and read a great majority of the polygamists out there have absolutely no interest in polygamy becoming legal.
Unless they happen to have a tv show on TLC.

[Scott Lloyd]

Early on in this thread (back on the first page, on Oct. 25), I quoted this from the Q and A section of the newly updated website:
 

Quote

 

Q: If I'm faithful enough, will my attractions go away?

A:

The intensity of same-sex attraction is not a measure of your faithfulness. Many people pray for years and do all they can to be obedient in an effort to reduce same-sex attraction, yet find they are still attracted to the same sex. Same-sex attraction is experienced along a spectrum of intensity and is not the same for everyone. Some are attracted to both genders, and others are attracted exclusively to the same gender. For some, feelings of same-sex attraction, or at least the intensity of those feelings, may diminish over time. In any case, a change in attraction should not be expected or demanded as an outcome by parents or leaders.

The intensity of your attractions may not be in your control; however, you can choose how to respond. Asking the Lord what you can learn from this experience and how this can become a strength to you can focus your faith on an outcome you can control. Turning your life over to God is an important act of faith that brings great blessings now and even greater blessings in the world to come.

 

While browsing for other things, I ran across this website from a psychologist who offers "psychological services to men and women whose same-sex attraction doesn't define them."

I've only had time to briefly glance through it. But the content seems to bear out what is said on "mormonandgay.org," that "same-sex attraction is experienced along a spectrum of intensity and is not the same for everyone. Some are attracted to both genders, and others are attracted exclusively to the same gender. For some, feelings of same-sex attraction, or at least the intensity of those feelings, may diminish over time."

One of the sections on Nicolosi's website highlights a number of celebrities who have left a gay lifestyle, having formerly asserted that they were 100 percent gay but having since found that there is more fluidity to their sexual natures than they earlier realized.

While I agree with the Church website that "a change in attraction should not be expected or demanded as an outcome by parents or leaders," I do believe that in many cases, the door should be left open to the development of heterosexual attraction strong enough to sustain a proper marriage between a man and a woman.

Edited November 2, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Daniel2]

58 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Early on in this thread (back on the first page, on Oct. 25), I quoted this from the Q and A section of the newly updated website:
 

While browsing for other things, I ran across this website from a psychologist who offers "psychological services to men and women whose same-sex attraction doesn't define them."

I've only had time to briefly glance through it. But the content seems to bear out what is said on "mormonandgay.org," that "same-sex attraction is experienced along a spectrum of intensity and is not the same for everyone. Some are attracted to both genders, and others are attracted exclusively to the same gender. For some, feelings of same-sex attraction, or at least the intensity of those feelings, may diminish over time."

One of the sections on Nicolosi's website highlights a number of celebrities who have left a gay lifestyle, having formerly asserted that they were 100 percent gay but having since found that there is more fluidity to their sexual natures than they earlier realized.

While I agree with the Church website that "a change in attraction should not be expected or demanded as an outcome by parents or leaders," I do believe that in many cases, the door should be left open to the development of heterosexual attraction strong enough to sustain a proper marriage between a man and a woman.

Hey, Scott,

The link you posted for "this website" takes us to page 1 of this thread.  Can you find the link and repost?

Thanks,

Daniel

EDIT:  I just noticed that you invoke the name of the Dr, later in your post, as Nicolosi.  Assuming you are speaking of Dr. Joseph Nicholosi, he is one of the major proponents of so-called reparative/conversion therapy and a former member of NARTH (the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality), the largest religiously-based reparative/conversion therapy organization.  The APA has denounced reparative/conversion therapy, or sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE).  See here.  I myself underwent such therapies with two different LDS therapists who studied under Nicolosi and/or adopted similar theories regarding the suppression of "SSA": Jeff Robinson and David Matheson.  In my opinion, both advocate for false hope and encourage marriage to women, something that I and far too many men did.  Therapy sessions included pounding punching bags with baseball bats while repeatedly screaming "DAD! DAD! DAD!" and then acting concerned when I said I didn't want to keep doing that.  8 years later after I was unable to continue in a failed mixed-orientation marriage, I called Dr. Robinson and asked him if I could have access to my file to see his notes on me.  He told me he didn't keep files on his clients and had nothing I could see.  When I asked him, "If you don't keep files, how do you know your therapies work or last?," he literally hung up on me and never again returned any of my calls.  I wouldn't wish reparative/conversion therapy on my worst enemies.  It is snake oil, and Nicolosi is one of the worst.  I don't mind when therapists of any given religious orientation resolve to help men who experience attractions to members of their own gender though helping them find realistic alternatives to live according to their religious convictions and desires... but Nicholosi  and the men who follow similar types of therapy are not the answer, in my view.  If anyone is seriously considering this type of therapy, I would invite you to do your homework and learn all you can about it from ALL available sources, rather than cherry picking sources that sound supportive while outright dismissing those that aren't.

Edited November 1, 2016 by Daniel2

[Daniel2]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Interestingly according to what I hear and read a great majority of the polygamists out there have absolutely no interest in polygamy becoming legal.
Unless they happen to have a tv show on TLC.

Yes, that has been my experience as well, in interacting with many polygamists. 

Unfortunately, many wish to avoid government scrutiny (and certainly have understandable historic reasons for concern, given government raids, etc), and often times by maintaining their status as a series of unwed mothers, they use and abuse the welfare system and get lots of free handouts.  Of course, many avoid public scrutiny and approval because they also abuse children and marry teenage girls.  I would hope that government regulations and the minds of those more attuned to such legally complicated realities might find better ways to help regulate against such abuses on all counts.

[JLHPROF]

Just now, Daniel2 said:

Yes, that has been my experience as well, in interacting with many polygamists.

Unfortunately, many wish to avoid government scrutiny (and certainly have understandable historic reasons for concern, given government raids, etc), and often times by maintaining their status as a series of unwed mothers, they use and abuse the welfare system and get lots of free handouts.  Of course, many avoid public scrutiny and approval because they also abuse children and marry teenage girls.  I would hope that government regulations and the minds of those more attuned to such legally complicated realities might find better ways to help regulate against such abuses on all counts.

Ok.
My experience has been that the majority of them don't want polygamy legal because they believe, like monogamy, it will be corrupted by society.
In the early days of the Church Joseph F. Smith gave several discourses stating that polygamy was so holy and sacred only pure righteous people should consider entering it.

I have read of fundamentalists that don't want it legalized because they believe civilly acceptable polygamy would be akin to blasphemy, allowing men to satisfy their lusts and leave God out of it.
But yeah, I'm sure some of them want the welfare perks for "single" mothers too.