Gay Affirmative Psychotherapy in real-time (a primary Interview) Theoretical Orientation and Guiding Principles
So much for the damage done throughout the years to LGBT people was justified by misinterpreting the findings of research to pathologize homosexuality or advertising outcomes of studies with problematic methodologies, including the Spitzer (2003) research described earlier in the day. Also when conceding that homosexuality is certainly not a disease, some scientists have cherry selected information to bolster the superiority of heterosexuality or even to argue the appropriateness of modification treatments for people individuals that are gay desire to change regardless of the impact of stigma (Glassgold, Fitzgerald, & Haldeman, 2002; Yarhouse & Throckmorton, 2002).
Such roles and methods reveal the level to which individual sex has been grasped solely via a heterosexual paradigm of sex. The emergence of homosexuality, bisexuality , and transgender sex from their closets has threatened the hegemony of heterosexuality. The end result is to mobilize opposition against acceptance of homosexuality as normal and healthier, also to reinforce the domination and authority of heterosexuality because the only form that is legally acceptable of. By comparison, the style of sex suggested in gay affirmative psychotherapy doesn’t denigrate heterosexuality, but assumes that sexuality is more fluid and adjustable than exclusive heterosexuality permits. While intimate orientation (whether a person is homosexual, right, bisexual, or transgender) can be reasonably fixed, intimate identification (whether one calls yourself homosexual, straight, bisexual, transgender, or otherwise not) and intimate behavior are far more adjustable.