AntiPsychiatry RALLY - Toronto Canada -- APA Convention

Investigator/Instigator of Miraculous and Paranormal Phenomena;-)..............(and wild Irish ndn too;-)

oobooboobooboobooboo...make oooo sound...tap lips;-)

http://www.lightparty.com/Spirituality/Iroquois.html

If you don't KNOW where your Ideas come from...you may be a victim of MIND CONTROL.

AND YES....I'm talking about the SAME APA and AMA :-)
Look up the history of the APA and Psychiatry and the CIA.....

http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=PSYCHIATRY+and+the+CIA&form=QBRE

Look up the ROOTS of Psychiatry, a history lesson?.

THIS IS REAL RESEARCH

Contact Larry Houston at Larry@banap.net.Historical PerspectiveSaturday March 26th, 2005. By the same authorsLarry HoustonJournal ArticlesGay Teen SuicideBooksChapter 11: Homosexuality TodayHomosexual ParentingIn the same sectionIn the same sectionBiological Basis for HomosexualityA Historical Perspective The concept of the ‘modern homosexual’ can be traced back to the 1860s in Germany. It was homosexuals themselves advocating for legal rights in Germany who first began writing and talking about the idea of the homosexual being a distinct type of person. The word itself, homosexual, was coined in 1869. Homosexual as a word is a unitary construct that is derived from the Greek term ‘homos’ for same, and ‘sexualis’ a Medieval Latin word for sexual. It is interesting to read what those advocating homosexuality believe. The following are quotes taken from books by those advocating for homosexuality. “Homosexuality is commonly and widely understood to describe sexual attraction for those of one’s own sex. There does not seem to be anything problematic or uncertain in such a definition. Nevertheless, the theoretical enterprise of deciding exactly what constitutes homosexuality- or, more pragmatically, who is homosexual-is far from self-evident. While there is a certain population of men and women who may be described more or less unproblematically homosexual, a number of ambiguous circumstances can cast doubt on the precise delimitations of homosexuality as a descriptive category.” (Jagose, Queer Theory, p.7) “The modern western concept of the homosexual is, according to some historians, primarily a creation of late nineteenth-century medical-science discourses. In the context of elaborating systems of classification and descriptions of different sexualities, as part of a quest to uncover the truth about human nature, the homosexual is said to have stepped forward as a distinct human type with his/her own mental and physical nature.” (Seidman. Embattled Eros, p.146) “In sum, homosexuality is not one but many things, many psychosocial forms, which can be viewed as symbolic mediations between psychocultural and historical conditions and human potentials for sexual response across life course.” (Herdt, Same Sex, Different Cultures, p. 55) Up until the 1860s the concept of homosexuality was seen as a sin or a crime. Now it began to take on medical and scientific concepts. Within these concepts there rest the premise of biological or organic causes for homosexuality. I want to talk about what one does, ‘homosexuality’ over and above the idea of a ‘homosexual’ who one is. There are consequences to what does. Throughout history in all cultures and societies it was homosexuality, homosexual behavior that may be seen and tolerated. The norm has always been marriage, male and female relationships for procreation. There are historically significant events that may be marked in the development of the concept of the ‘modern homosexual’ as a distinct person.

But it was Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) in this medical and scientific discourse of homosexuality who was the first one to challenge the entire construction of a distinct sexual instinct, a third sex, as it had been commonly viewed by Ulrichs and others. His view was that homosexuality was a sexual object choice. It was the outcome of early childhood experiences, child and parental relationships. Homosexuality was an arrested psychosexual development and was purely the result of fixation in an infantile stage of sexual development, provoked by the action or inaction of the parents. It was caused by environmental influences rooted in family dynamics such as a seductive strong mother and a weak father. This resulted in the compulsive quest of the male that was caused by their restless flight from the female. With Freud’s view, homosexuality no longer incorporated the broad meaning of sex-role deviation; instead it referred specifically to aberrant sexual behavior. Homosexuality was acquired and pathological.

The removing of homosexuality as a sexual disorder was as a result of a three year long social/political campaign by gay activists, pro-gay psychiatrists and gay psychiatrists, not as a result of valid scientific studies. Rather the activities were public disturbances, rallies, protests, and social/political pressure from within by gay psychiatrists and by others outside of the APA upon the APA. The action of removing homosexuality was taken with such unconventional speed that normal channels for consideration of the issues were circumvented. This action taken in the APA had dramatic consequences on psychosexual life according to Charles Socarides in a article published in The Journal of Psychohistory, “Sexual Politics and Scientific Logic: The Issue of Homosexuality.” Socarides writes the removal of homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual was a false step with the following results. “This amounted to a full approval of homosexuality and an encouragement to aberrancy by those who should have known better, both in the scientific sense and in the sense of the social consequences of such removal.” (Socarides, Charles W. “Sexual Politics and Scientific Logic: The Issue of Homosexuality,” p.320-321) In this article he described a movement within the American Psychiatric Association that through social/political activism resulted in a two-phase radicalization of a main pillar of psychosocial life. The first phase was the erosion of heterosexuality as the single acceptable sexual pattern in our culture. This was followed by the second phase the raising of homosexuality to the level of an alternative lifestyle. As a result homosexuality became an acceptable psychosocial institution alongside heterosexuality as a prevailing norm of sexual behavior. “In essence, this movement within the American Psychiatric Association has accomplished what every other society, with rare exceptions, would have trembled to tamper with, a revision of the basic code and concept of life and biology: that men and women normally mate with the opposite sex and not with each other.” (Socarides, Charles W. “Sexual Politics and Scientific Logic: The Issue of Homosexuality,” p.321) The hijacking of science in the APA by those advocating homosexuality has now taken a very interesting twist. Thirty years later after this decision by the APA, Robert L. Spitzer, M.D. who was instrumental in the removal of homosexuality in 1973 from the lists of sexual disorders in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual is once again facing the anger of others. The first time was by those who opposed the normalization of homosexuality. Now after publishing the results of a study showing that some people may change their sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual, it is those advocating for homosexuality. Dr. Spitzer’s study and peer commentaries have just been published in the October 2003 issue of the “Archives of Sexual Behavior.” “An additional personal parallel-the anger that has been directed towards me for doing this study reminds of a similar reaction to me during my involvement in the removal of the diagnosis of homosexuality from DSM-II in 1973.” (Spitzer, “Reply: Study Results Should Not be Dismissed and Justify Further Research on the Efficacy of Sexual Reorientation Therapy”, p. 472) The “homosexuality” being advocated for today has a history that can be traced to the 1860s in Germany. This “homosexuality” has resulted in profound changes and consequences for our culture and society that continues today. The identity of a “homosexual” today is a political identity held by a very small number of individuals. Along with others advocating for “homosexuality” there is an attempt for unprecedented social experiments not seen before in history. These social experiments have been supported by “threats and intimation,” deliberate “deceit and deception” by those advocating for homosexuality. When we will be allowed to question the impact of these social experiments in an open and honest dialogue? If history continues as it is being lived out today, a very loud vocal minority will continue to have its way resulting in the continual detriment for the majority. Bibliography Bancroft, John. “Homosexual Orientation The search for a biological basis.” British Journal Of Psychiatry. 1994, 164, 437-440. Bayer, Ronald. Homosexuality and the American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis. Basic Books. New York, 1981. Byne, William MD, PhD, and Bruce Parsons, MD, PhD. “Human Sexual Orientation The Biological Theories Reappraised.” Archives of General Psychiatry. March 1993. Vol.50, 228-239. Clausen, Jan. Beyond Gay or Straight: Understanding Sexual Orientation. Chelsa House Publishers. Philadelphia, 1997. Connell, R. W. and G. W. Dowsett. Rethinking Sex Social Theory and Sexuality Research. Melbourne University Press. Melbourne, 1992. De Cecco, John P. “Confusing the Actor With the Act: Muddled Notions About Homosexuality.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. 1990, Vol.19, No.4, 409-412. D’Emilio, John. Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities The Making of a Homosexual Minority in the United States 1940-1970. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 1988. D’Emilio, John D. Making Trouble Essays on Gay History, Politics, and the University. Routledge. New York & London, 1992. D’Emilio, John & Estelle B. Freedman. Intimate Matters A History of Sexuality in America. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago & London, 1997. D’Emilio, John. The World Turned. Duke University Press. Durham and London, 2002. Duggan, Lisa & Nan D. Hunter. Sex Wars Sexual Dissent and Political Culture. Routledge. New York & London, 1995. Dynes, Wayne R. Editor. Encyclopedia of Homosexuality Volume 1 A-L. Garland Publishing, Inc. New York, 1990. Dynes, Wayne R. Editor. Encyclopedia of Homosexuality Volume 2 M - Index. Garland Publishing, Inc. New York, 1990. Herdt, Gilbert. Same Sex, Different Cultures Gays and Lesbians Across Cultures. WestviewPress. 1997. Jagose, Annamarie. Queer Theory. Melbourne University Press, 1996. LeVay, Simon. Queer Science. The MIT Press. Cambridge, MA, 1996. LeVay, Simon and Elisabeth Nonas. City of Friends. The MIT Press. Cambridge, MA and London,1995. Levine, Martin P. Gay Macho. New York University Press. New York and London, 1998. Loughery, John. The Other Side of Silence. Henry Holt and Company. New York, 1998.

WHERE ARE YOU COMING FROM ???????

http://forums.thepoliticalasylum.com/search.php?searchid=209143

http://forums.thepoliticalasylum.com/showthread.php?p=135839#post135839

YOU DON'T KNOW ME FROM GOD :-(

Investigator/Instigator of Miraculous and Paranormal Phenomena;-)..............(and wild Irish ndn too;-)

oobooboobooboobooboo...make oooo sound...tap lips;-)

http://www.lightparty.com/Spirituality/Iroquois.html

If you don't KNOW where you're coming from....FIND OUT.

» edit | reply | email this comment | report as spam | 0 points
homophobic hate speech
Submitted by jas on Sun, 2007-09-02 08:06.
LOOKnLEARN,
I might have taken the time to check out the links you posted, but your homophobic hate speech has eroded any credibility you may have had. I won't waste any more of my time w/ your so-called "contributions" to this online community. If you want people to pay attention to your posts, try a little more respectful decorum for the forum.
jas

BUTT BUTT BUTT.....GOD likes me just like I am......YOU GOT A PROBLEM WITH GOD....or just like being IGNORANT

http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=definition+ignorant&FORM=MSNH

Maybe you should make the links easier to click on :-I

ig·no·rant [ ígn?r?nt ]

adjective

Definition:

1. lacking knowledge: lacking knowledge or education in general or in a specific subject

2. unaware: unaware of something
ignorant of the danger

3. resulting from lack of knowledge: caused by a lack of knowledge, understanding, or experience
an ignorant mistake

4. Caribbean quarrelsome: quarrelsome and aggressive

GAYS are the BRAINWASHED FOOT SOLDIERS OF THE CIA and the AQUARIAN CONSPIRACY ......truth.