(June 21, 2014 at 11:10 pm)Zen Badger Wrote:

(June 21, 2014 at 8:58 pm)Heywood Wrote: I agree with your point but at best all it can be used for is to claim there is simply no need to treat homosexuality where as there is a need to treat pedophilia. My question is this: If pedophilia can be treated why can't homosexuality? What is magical about homosexuality that makes it immune to treatment?

Treatments are not always formulated on needs but rather wants. Nobody needs to be treated for Alopecia....and because that is true should we ban the treatment of Alopecia? Of course not.

Why are you acting as if homosexuality is some sort of problem that needs to be treated?
Its only a problem in the minds of bigoted assholes that think that their way is the only way.

For some people it is a problem and they want to be treated for it. We have such an example in this very thread. Isn't it also being an asshole if you say, "sorry you don't really have a problem so were not going to let you get the treatment you want....or let the treatment you want come into existence"?

Further, just because the treatment for something not very effective today, doesn't mean new treatment protocols won't be effective in the future. There was a time when the treatment of sepsis wasn't very effective.

Let suppose, hypothetically speaking, a country like Iran develops a pill that turns most gay people straight with little or no serious side effects. Would there be a demand for such a product? I bet there would.....even in societies in which homosexuality is completely accepted.

(June 21, 2014 at 11:10 pm)Zen Badger Wrote: Why are you acting as if homosexuality is some sort of problem that needs to be treated?
Its only a problem in the minds of bigoted assholes that think that their way is the only way.

To be fair to heywood he's not even saying that. The comparison he makes is in my mind, an interesting one.

The obvious differences between homosexuality and paedophilia have already been pointed out, however I think the key thing in both is that they are not necessarily chosen. People often forget that a paedophile doesn't choose to be attracted to children any more than a gay guy chooses to be attracted to guys, or a straight guy likes women.

SteelCurtain points out the correct distinction though, the reason why paedophilia is wrong and being gay is ok is because one is dealing with consenting adults and the other isn't. The attraction can't be stopped or 'reversed' in either instance, but in the case of paedophilia such a person should be educated on why acting upon their sexual desires is morally reprehensible.

That's the kind of 'therapy' that should be used. But for gay people it is not necessary, as there is not anything morally wrong with being gay, and having sex with another consenting adult.

(June 21, 2014 at 10:46 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote: . . . . You cannot change someone's system of arousal. It is set sometime in adolescence.
. . . .

I have a very clear recollection of being in third grade when I noticed the junior high boys smelled very good after PE on their way to the shower. It only happened once, but I have a vivid memory of it. I still like a good stink on an older man.

For me, it is the unrealistic expectation of what gay-to-straight therapy promises. Also, the ethical road that it sets out on. Some day in the future, we'll likely have some sort of gene therapy or brain treatment for arousal. While it would be great for pedophiles, it would quickly get abused by religious people crusading on "God's work."

I'm 56 and my interest in older men persists. It can be quite funny when a 60 year old lonely man realizes he is in my crosshairs. Particularly the straight ones.

Where I'm headed is, since 3rd grade, and despite a plethora (of sorts) of various fun sexual encounters, I persist in my desire. I guess it doesn't disprove aversion therapy in cases like mine (and why anyone would bother attempting to change what I, or others with my inclination, find 'hot' is a mystery) but what I do conclude is that the opposite of aversion therapy doesn't work, at least on me. I've been with younger men, better shape, stamina, etc, and while it might be fun, I soon find myself looking again for that guy just a few years older than me. They're the best, straight (when they demure) and gay alike.

I encountered a divorced 61 YO man a year ago, he is occasionally on the DL, and he encountered me. His idea of pillow talk was asphalt and sand and gravel (his business). I found it fascinating. Really, and I think he immensely enjoyed having someone interested in his interest.

The evening started on a happy note for him, and ended in a similar happy spot for me.

Older men are the best . . .

(June 21, 2014 at 7:46 pm)Heywood Wrote: I don't know if conversion therapy is effective or not. However I do ask myself if pedophilia can be treated why can't homosexuality? Further if someone wants to be treated for homosexuality....why should we prevent it?

Paedophilia is a condition that is truly damaging to one of the parties involved and if consummated it is through rape.

Homosexuality is just another form of partnership between adults.

What if someone wanted to stop being straight and wanted treatment so that they would enjoy sucking off men but at the moment they don't, would you treat them?

What is your stance on straight to gay therapy?

The only reason anyone would ever feel the need to be cured of homosexuality is because of the social stigma and the judgement that results from this. Since the only harm that homosexuality causes is offending those that insist that the social stigma is just, the more moral approach is to find a solution to the problem that doesn't encourage self-loathing and hatred for something that cannot be controlled. The fact that those against homosexuality want to encourage such self-hatred based on nothing more than their own opinion should cause them to truly reflect on how ethical their beliefs truly are and cause the rest of us to feel compelled to drag them into the 21st century kicking and screaming.

(June 22, 2014 at 4:47 pm)Faith No More Wrote: The only reason anyone would ever feel the need to be cured of homosexuality is because of the social stigma and the judgement that results from this.

I disagree. I can imagine some people might prefer to have the attraction to the opposite sex, when it comes to having kids. Like it or not, gay people can't really have a child that bears the genes of both parents. Unless there is some technology or procedure I don't know about that enables two guys or two women have a child that bears the genes of both, they simply can't. For me, personally, it would be very important that if I ever did have a kid, it would share the features and DNA of the one other person I love. That's just me, I understand it's not important to everyone, but I can certainly see why a person might want to be 'turned' heterosexual if they would prefer a loving relationship with a partner who is capable of having a baby the natural way.

There are ways of having children without having sex with someone. Also I doubt it would be that horrible an experience to have sex with someone you're not attracted to, until a baby is born.

(June 22, 2014 at 6:41 pm)Chad32 Wrote: There are ways of having children without having sex with someone. Also I doubt it would be that horrible an experience to have sex with someone you're not attracted to, until a baby is born.

You're missing my point. It's not possible (at least as far as I know) for a homosexual couple to have children that share the genes of both parents.