The repercussions if Homosexuality was found to be a medical condition

Define "mental illness".

Without using nonsensical terms like "natural" or bringing similarly unscientific prejudice-stroking terminology.

Since we know, for a fact, that there are no physiological or mental defects associated with homosexual behavior, the premise is simply false. Being gay can only be considered an illness if you are completely ignorant of science and terminology.

Too many Christian cultists around these parts. Now that's an area for examining mental defects... As a matter of fact, religious fundamentalists are associated with lower IQ (not moderates mind you). Homosexuality is not.

a reply to: Kalixi

I think the answer here is. Who Cares?

Just let people live how they want to.

If it becomes "curable", will it then also be transmitable? Like, you could poke someone with a syringe and make them turn gay? Ah man I'd be furious lol!

a reply to: Kalixi

The focus of this post is solely on the social ramifications if homosexuality were able to be cured.

Did you mean 'the focus of this thread'?

It is my focus as well.

The crux of my post was the words 'Whether or not that difference is classified as a disease or abnormality... is up to us.'

The classification will determine social attitudes towards homosexuality and, by extension, towards homosexuals. How it is classified is up to us, but our individual decisions become the collective judgement of society.

originally posted by: darkbake
I was reading that the neurological construction of a homosexual man's brain is similar to a woman's and the neurological construction of a homosexual woman's brain is similar to a man's. This doesn't make it curable, though, because it is based on the actual physical structure of the brain. I think it does more to justify homosexuality.

With the discovery of neuroplasticity, we know that behavior affects brain structure, so one is faced with a "chicken vs the egg" paradox--which came first, the brain shape or the behavior?

Regardless, would it really matter if the behavior was found to be a "curable" medical condition? They would and should still have rights, just like anyone else. Some may avail themselves of the treatment, some may not and radicals on both sides will either demand that the treatment be banned or mandated depending on what side they fall.

originally posted by: BeenieWeenie
a reply to: BeenieWeenie

Compare and contrast someone with undiagnosd schizophrenia shooting and killing 12 people in a movie theater with the HIV positive who (knowingly positive) goes out and infects a greater number without feeling any guilt.

But that would be more about sociopathy than homosexuality.

a reply to: mwood

I think they would just dismiss it as lies even if it was proven.

I never understood how people say your "born that way".

If a man is sexually attracted to animals he is mentally ill,

If a man is sexually attracted to underage girls he is mentally ill,

If a man is sexually attracted to "_________" he is mentally ill,

But if a man is sexually attracted to another man he was born that way??

No, I believe he is mentally ill, just like all the other examples.

Well, mental illness is involuntary, so at least your argument nixes the claim that 'it's a choice'.

Is abnormal sexuality a mental illness? If someone is functionally normal in every other department in life, but happens to be attracted to sheep or children, how can they be classified as mentally ill? It's a tough question. Current psychiatric practice seems to be that a condition is classified as an illness if it causes distress (even to people other than the patient). There are other criteria, too, but that seems to be the clincher. Therefore active paedophilia is a mental illness, and active bestiality may or may not be, depending on circumstances. By the same criterion, homosexuality cannot be any kind of illness as long as it is only expressed among consenting adults. Mountain Laurel is correct as far as that goes.

But diseases, strange to say, are social constructs as well as organic conditions. The Victorians had lots of diseases we no longer recognize as such — google 'neuraesthenia' or 'bicycle face'; they had medicines for this stuff. In my own country many rural folk still believe that the symptoms of illness are caused by demonic possession and that the way to cure them is to drive the demon out. Whether or not homosexuality is classified as a disease depends on who is doing the classifying. If this thread proves anything, it proves that. But homophobic conservatives can't have it both ways; it's either a disease or a choice. It can't be both.

My own belief is that calling someone mentally ill because of their sexuality gets us nowhere. All desires are genuine and — this may be hard for some of you to swallow — legitimate in and of themselves. But some desires cannot be satisfied for the good of other people, and of society. Therefore we put active paedophiles and rapists in prison. That is right and proper. But no-one is harmed by homosexual activity between consenting adults (assuming the usual precautions, of course). It is neither the symptom of a disease, nor of moral depravity, and it is certainly not a crime against nature.

I think homosexuality is part genetic and part learned behaviour. This stems from the fact that we are not being told the full story on present reproduction figures. It's a well known fact that there is massive amounts of oestrogen in the natural environment, namely the water supply. As oestrogen is the female hormone (used for contraception) naturally male foetuses will be blasted with it in the womb, resulting in more feminized males than male males. No matter where you live just look around you and see more and more feminized males, not gay but feminized (or effeminate if you want to use that term). They grow up not men not women but lean more to be attracted to men. Whether you want to believe it or not sexuality is determined in the womb, male, female and in between, the rest is learned behaviour. No one can cure it as there is nothing to be cured. If you want to bring it down to the nasty bit it is developed in the womb and it can be tested if a male foetus is more feminized then what do you do. I don't want the answer.

Hypothetically speaking (since no such procedure exists) I'd give it a try, as long as I can change it back if I don't like being heterosexual.

I don't think I'd need a new wardrobe or anything, since I'm pretty average male dressing and acting, and I guess I can keep my beard.
I'd have to find some new porn sites though.

There have apparently been some very rare cases where people changed sexual orientation after a stroke (both ways).
However, the changes come with a complete change of personalities and careers, and such individuals are often abandoned by family and friends who cannot deal with the altered personalities.
Will I come out afterwards as a "regular" straight guy or a perverted, dirty halfoldman who steals ladies' underwear from the neighbor's washing line? Will I become an aggressive wife-beater?

It will be hard to find a partner as a regular straight guy at my age, since most of my female friends are hitched.
Will I still be allowed to be close friends with them without making the husbands jealous, and will I be able to keep my paws off their breasts?
I'll need a how to pick up women guide.
Perhaps I'll have to approach a local culture where one can by wives for livestock, Old Testament style.
How will I relate to other men, and will I still be able to enjoy male camaraderie as much as I do now, or will they just be competition?
Alternatively I could finally join the celibate Catholic priesthood without lying about my sexuality, although that would be considered a waste of money by many. I'm sure such procedures wouldn't be cheap, although the super rich could flip their sexuality for a weekend party and then revert.

If such a procedure existed it should go both ways, and there might be straight and bisexual guys who also choose to go totally gay (perhaps just for the experience).
As long as I can change back after I've had an heir and a spare, and the wife doesn't like me and divorces me.
I couldn't afford to be a straight moose on the loose with tons of paternity suits.
But yeah, why not see how the other side lives?

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck
a reply to: Kalixi
Essentially, you are asking gays if they are comfortable within their own skins. That's not a fair question, as it does not take into account the issues that many have to deal with in being unaccepted in a sometimes harsh social environment. So your query is actually "Are you tired enough of taking crap that you wish you'd never been born gay?"

I think you ought to have a chat with your gay friends, first.

Actually the question was not posed to people who identified as LGBTI but to the wider community. We say we have come a long way with the majority of the population now accepting homosexual marriage and promoting gay rights but I wonder whether any head-way that we have made could disapparate in an instant if science could reverse homosexuality.

I get your position and sensibility, it is a contentious issue. I for one am not afraid to ask the uncomfortable questions. I think ignorance and fear, from both sides of the fence, prevent us from our social evolution. Mine is a quest for knowledge

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Kalixi

so we coulded " cure " hetrosexuality too ?

If science could be applied to cure or change something it could surely be applied to reverse it and in this exploration change a straight person to being gay. That would be an interesting punishment for people convicted of 'gay bashing', imagine if they had to live a week in the life as a homosexual/intersex person. Surely it would make homophobic people understand and possible not reoffend

a reply to: boymonkey74

I also think that many would be forced into treatment by family.

The fundamentalist Christians etc would jump on the science and open up their own treatment centres. It's funny how they would embrace that science but ignore the myriad of science that disproves their beliefs

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
If homophobia was found to be an illness should we cure it or would that be political correctness gowne maaaaad

I replied to someone else that if you could cure homosexuality you could also apply science in a way to turn a homophobe gay as punishment so they learn just exactly the damage that they have done. I doubt they'd reoffend if they were returned to their normal sexuality. (although the majority of homophobes are actually gay and the hatred that they have for themselves is redirected at other gay people)

a reply to: Kalixi

Why in an over populated world, would it be beneficial or ethical to 'cure' homosexuality?

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Kalixi

Why in an over populated world, would it be beneficial or ethical to 'cure' homosexuality?

More to the point, why would it be beneficial to cure homosexuality at all?

Just to make someone other than the person who is gay happy?

Extreme selfishness in action right there by those who promote such ideas

How about we find a cure for religious belief and fix all the crazy fundies in Islam and Christianity?

I think if I had such a procedure done (assuming a futuristic world) I'd at least expect a complimentary manual, such as "Male Heterosexuality For Dummies".

Ooh, I cant wait for my first homophobic post.

However some things would leave me a bit confused.

What if a straight buddy put his arm around my shoulders, or some guy slapped my butt with a gym towel?
Wouldn't that totally repel me as a newly straight man?
Would I have to repress anything, even my dislike of other men and their bodies within a certain radius?
Until now I know when not to react (or withdraw) during male horseplay, but as a certified straight man I should feel quite comfortable towel-whipping everybody, or giving them bear hugs.
I'm not sure this will really be appreciated by all?

It would certainly be like visiting another country.
Some countries one likes, and others one likes to leave again, never to return.

Some studies have shown that between 10 to 30% of the population could be classified as BIsexual on the Heterosexual–Homosexual Rating Scale.
en.wikipedia.org...
jezebel.com...

originally posted by: Annee

No parent of a minor should have legal rights to alter natural born chemistry.

Just curious, would you apply the same principle to parents who use hormonal treatment on a child who thinks he/she is transgender to facilitate said transgender change?

I can picture it like one of those romantic or epic movie scenes:

"It's OK now guys - I'm straight! I've got the medical report to prove it. Let's have a bromance or do something butch."

I'll probably hate every minute of it, which is great.
Huh?

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

No parent of a minor should have legal rights to alter natural born chemistry.

Just curious, would you apply the same principle to parents who use hormonal treatment on a child who thinks he/she is transgender to facilitate said transgender change?

Parents don't make that decision.