![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Well, perhaps in a way it is. Certainly the society they want and are used to will be gone, but hopefully it will be replaced by one in which more people are free to be happily themselves.
One of the references on the second page will be familiar to some of you: Zucker, cited in support of the idea that in "pathological cases" children's exploration of gender can become "inflexible, compulsive, persistent and rigidly stereotyped".
There are a few sentences mentioning young girls, mostly saying there is little known about them. I guess no one is interested in women.
He describes the case of a young person referred to him and "as having a severe
cross gender identity problem". Interspersed with the rest of the article is an account of how this person was treated by being denied social attention when expressing feminine interests and rewarded for masculine ones, as well as being provided a male role model and trained to be more athletic and properly masculine.
"Since the age of our [sic] years, Carl had pronounced feminine voice inflection and feminine speech content. He was extremely verbal, and his conversations were dominated by topics such as dresses, cosmetics, maternal roles, female impersonators, delivering babies, and female underclothing. He had several recurring exclamatory feminine sounding remarks, such as "goodness gracious," and "oh, dear me."
His feminine gestures were exaggerations of an effeminate, swishy gait and arm movements. He would typically sit with his legs crossed very effeminately and his arms folded like a female model. At home, he would frequently use towels after a bath to simulate female garments and long hair.
In his peer relationships, Carl passively allowed boys to lease [sic]him without asserting himself in return. He preferred girls in play, assuming the female role himself with great....played house with his sister frequently. Carl was ostracized by his male peers who labeled him "sissy" and "queer." He harbored a strong fear of "getting hurt" and feigned illnesses and injuries to avoid play with boys. Not only was Carl labeled [sic] by his peers as effeminate, but also he referred to himself as a "sissy" and "fag," and his speech regularly implied that he preferred to be considered a girl.
Carl's feminine behavior was increasingly leading him to social isolation, ridicule, and chronic unhappiness. His mother, who had found his feminine gestures to be amusing before he was age four, was very alarmed when they persisted to the age of eight years. She strongly wanted him to receive professional help, and she requested help herself to solve the related problems in her family."
The tone of the article is, throughout, as if gay male attraction and/or gender variance is a problem, something wrong, unwholesome and to be corrected if at all possible. Phrases such as "[i]n terms of atypical gender development in children, the literature deals almost exclusively with the cases of deficit masculine development in boys, including cross gender identity disturbance, gender role behavior disturbance and homosexual behavior development" are used.
Reckers claims that because the children referred to him were not found to be physically abnormal, to have no evidence of anything hormonally abnormal with their mothers, the most likely cause is the environment in which they were raised. I am going to quote another (two) paragraph(s) but not, this time, let it speak for itself.
"My first step in the analysis for the families of these boys was to focus upon the fathers, the father substitutes, and the male models available to these boys with inadequate masculine role development. The research literature of the psychosexual development of normal children has revealed that the father is the parent whose role behaviors are most likely to generate sex appropriate behaviors in the children in a family unit (Mead & Rekers, 1979). The characteristics that have been reported to foster the establishment of normal gender identity in children include the father's nurturance and dominance. In contrast, literature on the effects of paternal deprivation indicates that the sex role learning process is adversely affected when fathers are either physically or psychologically absent from the home (Biller, 1974; Hamilton, 1977).
The impact of paternal deprivation on psychosexual development is most conspicuous in the retrospective clinical studies of homosexual and transsexual men. But direct studies of the families of gender disturbed children have been few."
First, the easiest. Reckers is almost certainly speaking of transsexual women, not transsexual men, though I doubt he would care to listen to the correction of an advocate, being that he apparently deplores that medical professionals listened to actual gay male and lesbian perspectives when homosexuality was removed from the DSM.
Second, I am not going to dispute the evidence on which the conclusions are perhaps founded because I do not know it - although I am fairly confident from the numerous times I have seen this argument advanced in opposition to lesbian, gay and bisexual people being parents that it is thoroughly rubbish. I am however disputing his idea of what is appropriate. That a main purpose of a father is to be dominant, head of the family and impose a narrow range of appropriately gendered behaviour on his children is a horribly stifling and sexist notion. It tells parents that if their children deviate from normal, here used as a synonym for good, approved and 'healthy', rather than for 'usual', it is their fault and their failure, their inability to hold to what we are told is a biblically approved family arrangement. Except, since blame for variation in children (sons & daughters and apparently there are no other kinds) is placed at the feet of the father for being an absent or inadequate role model, mothers are reduced to incubators and babysitters while the father serves as the only real parent, the one responsible for healthy development.
Oh, and for emphasis he takes the idea of nurturing, which is typically associated with women and mothers, and attaches it to the idea of fatherhood so don't forget who is really the important person in any household. I do not like nurturing being gendered as a female quality and would normally be delighted to see it associated with men too, but in this context it is just added awful.
And I nearly forgot. Even if a lack of father figures is a cause of the behaviours in question, it does not matter because they are not bad, they are not harmful and there is no need to discourage them. This next paragraph:
"In general, the picture of the fathers of gender disturbed children found in these data is in sharp contrast to the image of the idealized father who promotes masculinity in his sons through his psychological and physical presence, his active involvement with his children and with the family decision making, his leadership, his dominance and his nurturance (Mead & Rekers, 1979)."
I am quoting because it reminds me of this:
"[On preventing homosexuality in young boys]
Dr. Nicolosi, Focus on the Family [Comments (83)] 2005-Aug-18
[T]he boy's father has to do his part. He needs to mirror and affirm his son's maleness. He can play rough-and-tumble games with his son, in ways that are decidedly different from the games he would play with a little girl. He can help his son learn to throw and catch a ball. He can teach him to pound a square wooden peg into a square hole in a pegboard. He can even take his son with him into the shower, where the boy cannot help but notice that Dad has a penis, just like his, only bigger. [emphasis added]"
(The actual link to the source is now here)
Moving on...
"There are numerous interrelated reasons for intervening in the life of a boy diagnosed with a gender disturbance. The first reason for treatment is the psychological maladjustment of gender disturbed children. The second reason for intervention is to prevent severe sexual problems of adulthood such as transsexualism and homosexuality (Rekers, 1985b; Rekers & Kilgus, 1995) that are highly resistant to treatment in later phases of development. The third reason is to prevent the serious emotional, social and economic maladjustments secondary to severe adulthood sexual problems. And the fourth main reason is to cooperate with appropriate parental concern over gender deviance. I have published several detailed articles developing this rationale with reference to the clinical data (Rekers, 1977, 1984; Rekers, Bentler, Rosen & Lovaas, 1977; Rekers & Mead, 1980; Rekers, Rosen, Lovaas & Bentler, 1978; Rosen, Rekers & Bentler, 1978)."
So, to behave outside the bounds of socially approved masculinity means a boy is maladjusted and needs changing. Being bisexual, lesbian, gay or transsexual is a severe sexual problem and needs to be caught early so it can be cured. Bisexual, lesbian, gay or transsexual individuals are to blame for any problems they face in life and not a society that punishes them for who they are. It is appropriate for parents to seek to have their children altered so they better conform to approved ranges of behaviour and interest.
It is... difficult for me to describe how strenuously I disagree with these ideas. I think I shall say simply that these are not innately harmful behaviours or feelings and only become so because other people so object to them that they react with belittling, discrimination, violence, spreading lies about people. Murdering them. Spreading such awful ideas as these, telling people they are defective, wrong, severely disordered and need to be cured of basic components of their identity in order to be worthy human beings. And by implication giving cover to those who take these affirmations of people badwrong deviance as licence to harm them.
This man is hurting people. The ideas he espouses damage the ability of people to live happy lives and he is wrong to do so.
We now conclude our patient case story:
Because Carl enjoyed telling elaborate fantasized stories while drawing pictures on a chalkboard, the brief clinic intervention procedure was designed to demonstrate simple reinforcement control over the sex-typed verbal behavior during the boy's story telling.
You will recall that Carl's conversations at the initial evaluation were dominated by topics such as dresses, cosmetics, maternal roles, female impersonators and female underwear. After obtaining a baseline measure of masculine and feminine speech content, a psychology intern introduced a differential social reinforcement contingency in which Carl's questions regarding masculine or neutral topics were answered by giving short, nonleading, direct answers, expressing positive interest. When Carl referred to a feminine topic, the psychology intern immediately withdrew social attention by looking away and by reading a magazine. If Carl persisted with direct questions regarding feminine topics, the intern expressed disinterest.
An ABA reversal design demonstrated reinforcement control over sex-typed speech; the therapeutic contingency resulted in a sharp decrease in feminine speech and an increase in masculine content. The data suggested, but did not confirm, a generalized suppression effect to feminine voice inflection as well, even though that behavior was not specifically treated.
Then Carl's mother was trained to administer a token and point economy reinforcement procedure in the home which successively increased Carl's masculine play with brother and decreased his feminine gestures, feminine speech content, feminine voice inflection and predominant play with his sister.
Because Carl's treatment in the clinic had not generalized to the home or to the school setting, his teacher was trained to apply a response cost procedure to what she called his "brat behaviors" and to his feminine/gesture mannerisms. The "brat behaviors" included: Creating a class disturbance, bossing another child, behaving rudely to teacher and teasing another child.
When the contingency was applied to the brat behaviors, they decreased immediately. The contingency for feminine gestures resulted in a gradual suppression of both gestures and feminine speech. These effects were found to be stimulus-specific to the classroom setting, necessitating a reintroduction of the contingencies into Carl's new classroom when he was promoted to the next grade level the following fall.
After a 15 month period, this treatment program in the clinic, home and school setting was completed. The social learning interventions for the boy had been combined with individual counseling for the mother and her marital problems and family relationship difficulties.
Carl and his mother were then referred for an independent evaluation by two clinical psychologists who administered tests, interviews and unobtrusive observations of the boy at school. They found no evidence of any feminine behavior or cross-gender identification in the boy after treatment. His mother, school teachers, and neighbors all agreed that he had changed in a comprehensive way from a feminine appearing to a masculine boy. Major improvements were found by those psychologists in Carl's overall social and emotional adjustment. However, Carl retained his previous social reputation as a "sissy" and "queer." We, therefore, assisted the mother in obtaining a transfer of Carl to a new school where he developed a normal social reputation and was well accepted by his peers.
However, Carl remained inept at most games and sports played by his male peers at school and in his home neighborhood. We, therefore, provided an additional 15 month program of behavior shaping procedures to overcome his deficits in throwing the ball, socking a playground ball, and in playing kickball. This training was combined with what are called "companionship therapy" in which a relationship was established between Carl and a male psychology student who modeled appropriate masculine behaviors and took Carl on numerous trips to the park, beach, and for tumbling lessons.
Twelve months after this additional program, another clinical evaluation was made of Carl's adjustment. Once again, no evidence of feminine behavior or cross gender identification were found. He was found to be normal in emotional and social adjustment.
Six years after the completion of therapy, we arranged another followup evaluation by an independent clinical psychologist. Carl was then 16 years and ten months of age. A comprehensive set of interviews, personality tests and observations were completed. This independent psychologist concluded: "This young man appears to be a normal gender appropriate adolescent boy with no salient evidences of difficulty in gender role or gender identity. He has some difficulty in feeling unsure of himself in social interactions and is generally, however, emotionally within the normal adolescent range."
Rekers claims that "[f]rom the result of my research studies, it now appears that a preventive treatment for transvestism, transsexualism, and some forms of homosexuality may have been isolated in these techniques of early identification and early intervention in the childhood years (Rekers, 1978, 1980, 1981b, 1983, 1987)."
That is very ambitious of you, Mr Rekers, but I, moderating my language, did not exhibit childhood symptoms, so perhaps you are overstating your claims just a tad.
Oh, but I half-skipped over something. Since, according to this article, the DSM IV states "By late adolescence or adulthood, about three-quarters of boys who had a childhood history of Gender Identity Disorder report a homosexual or bisexual orientation, but without concurrent Gender Identity Disorder. ... Some adolescents may develop a clearer cross-gender identification and request sex-reassignment surgery or may continue in a chronic course of gender confusion or dysphoria", Rekers claims "If the psychopathology of "Gender Identity Disorder of Childhood" is one of the major etiological precursors to adulthood homosexual orientation disturbance (as the research indicates at present), it would now appear logical that homosexuality per se be re-examined as a mental disorder."
Telling, though, that he wants homosexuality repathologised. In fact, this is from his suggestions for future research and study:
"2) Preliminary findings have been published in the literature which report on the positive therapeutic effects of religious conversion for curing transsexualism (Barlow, Abel & Blanchard, 1977) and on the positive therapeutic effect of a church ministry to repentant homosexuals (Pattison & Pattison, 1980). Further research should be addressed to the relationship of spiritual conversion and spiritual well-being upon sexual identity development and sexual adjustment. The anecdotal reports of the healing effects of the social support of a local church should be followed up with systematic empirical study."Makes me sick, this couching of conservative Christian bigotry and coercive social pressure in scientific terms. I hate lies and despise liars, especially when they bring harm to others and this, vile telling people they need to repent for who they are, as if there were something wrong with them when there is not, is among the worst.
Rekers has not at any point shown there to be a reason for 'treating' transsexual or homosexual people, beyond their lack of conformity to the roles demanded by the heterosexual Christian paradise he apparently wants. What he has done is advance the same narrative of decaying, dissolute societies depriving families of the father as head and ruler, supposedly necessary to keep everyone knowing their place in the world and keeping them to it, that I see nearly every time conservative Christians wish to deny others the right to their own choices in life.
It is dishonest, it is immoral, and it is only relevant if you want to shape society to be composed of so-called heterosexual families with father at the head, obedient wife and dutiful children existing in narrow range to satisfy the roles assigned to them. It may be satisfying for some, but to think everyone should live this way is, well, stupid.
This would be the time to point out it is hosted on the site of a religious organisation.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-11-05 12:10 (UTC)From:*sigh* Yeah. I suppose if they did not consider us mentally disordered they might have to listen to us. Or treat us like human beings.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-05 15:48 (UTC)From: (Anonymous)Belief in an imaginary being check
Belief that this makes them superior to others check
Belief that all others must think the way they do check
Abuse of authority check
Indoctrination and abuse of children check
Spousal abuse check
Yep, these people are definitely sick. They need corrective therapy now.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-05 15:50 (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2007-11-05 15:58 (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2007-11-05 12:45 (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2007-11-05 15:41 (UTC)From: (Anonymous)Faugh, I hate "experts" forcing their own narrow moralistic views on people by appealing to their own authority (Note that the quack quotes only from his own papers, not others' which may disagree with him).
no subject
Date: 2007-11-05 15:51 (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2007-11-05 15:54 (UTC)From:I did notice the incestuous (masturbatory? since when were citations metaphorical sex?) citing but chose not to mention it since my experience of astronomy is that there tends to be a small number of people working in a particular field so we end up with the same names being cited frequently in that area. This is really excessive even by that standard though.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-05 17:39 (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2007-11-05 18:25 (UTC)From:Which, I should mention, is something Focus on the Family is (in)famous for doing. They'll post an article claiming outrageous things about Teh Gay or whatever, then post editorials pointing to the article as if whateveritwas being claimed is absoute proven fact becasue look, there's an article about it. It's gotta be true if there's an article about it.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-05 19:34 (UTC)From:The problem with these studies is that they're not rly meant to change nething but merely to reinforce the shrinking niche that these morons occupy. :\ They know they're losing and more and more ppl are becoming open minded and accepting of new ideas, and so these studies aren't meant to change the minds of ppl who dun agree with them but to keep the ones on the border with them by doing the whole "oh but we have research too!" thing.
Like the whole "evolution is just a theory" thing. They want to throw enuf doubt so ppl will be like "I'd rather just keep the status quo until I find definitive proof" but they never will b/c the terms of victory for a lot of these ppl in the middle aren't for logical proofs but for one side to give in and say "k we can't find proof for a study" and that's not gonna happen. Those close minded bigots will always pump out studies that support their POV and it'll always give fodder for ppl like your mother who want to see what they want to see. >:\
It's basically saying "dun worry, stand your ground, you have ppl behind you, dun feel alone". >:\
*sighs*
Why is it so important for everybody to be the same neways?
no subject
Date: 2007-11-05 22:27 (UTC)From:*headdesk*
On the one hand, agreed on all points*, on the other STUPIDSsssss.
*your points *shifty eyes*
no subject
Date: 2007-11-06 06:19 (UTC)From:Whoops!
bags chanelbags
Date: 2012-01-16 16:44 (UTC)From: (Anonymous)