New book on parenting engenders anger in gays

Move over, Dr. Spock. Now, alongside parenting books on discipline, potty training, and sibling rivalry, there's this: "A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality."

In a message that has some people getting riled and others throwing out the welcome mat, authors Joseph and Linda Ames Nicolosi argue that homosexuality is a "disorder" that parents can head off. To do that, they say parents should toughen up "girlish" boys, feminize rough-and-tumble girls, and make sure their kids stick with toys, activities, and mannerisms traditionally aligned with their gender.

It's a controversial prescription - sure to get the daytime TV talk shows buzzing.

"He uses the ugliest of stereotypes, with a 'science' that is provably bankrupt," Wayne Besen, spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay and lesbian political group, says of Joseph Nicolosi. "His underlying message is that people can't find peace and happiness in being gay. It's complete nonsense."

But Len Deo, head of the New Jersey Family Policy Council, applauds the Nicolosis' message.

"Man was created to be in a complementary union with a woman - that's the natural order," he said. "No matter how you slice it, homosexuality is a tough lifestyle, and for parents, it's becoming more and more important to direct their children toward a normal, healthy lifestyle."

Joseph Nicolosi is no stranger to controversy. As founder and president of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, he has long argued that homosexuality is a disability that can be repaired.

In the new book, Nicolosi and his wife urge parents to intervene as soon as they spot trouble: a boy playing with dolls; a girl romping only with boys. They tell fathers to be close to their sons, showing them how to fill gas tanks and partake in sports, and they warn that if fathers don't hug their sons, someday another man will.

Mothers, they say, must avoid over-involvement in their boys' lives. Children should find playmates of the same gender, so girls who might tend toward lesbianism can learn feminine ways, and what he calls "pre-homosexual boys" can be toughened up by other boys' roughness.

Mainstream psychologists and gay rights advocates are not the only ones rankled by the Nicolosis' advice.

"His ideas sound like they're from the 1950s," said John Chapman, a Teaneck father of two girls, ages 15 and 19. "I was brought up with those ideas, and I can't imagine imposing them on my kids. Giving girls dolls or making boys play baseball won't make them heterosexual, though it may make them miserable and repress who they really are. We raised our children to know we would love them no matter what."

The bottom line is that no one is born gay, Joseph Nicolosi said in an interview, and the proper environment can help children "actualize their true heterosexual nature." He contends that boys become gay because they feel insecure in their masculinity, and girls become lesbians to make up for the lack of connection with their mothers.

They are ideas that the medical establishment rejected years ago. The American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, and the American Medical Association all concluded about 30 years ago that homosexuality is not a disorder. More recently, they note that several studies indicate at least some biological basis for sexual orientation.

"His ideas about homosexuality are a recitation of old psychoanalytic theories that never had any empirical support to begin with," said Douglas Haldeman, co-author of the American Psychological Association's guidelines for psychotherapy for lesbian, gay, and bisexual clients. Haldeman says his colleagues have been firing off e-mails raging about the book. "His ideas are totally out of step with the social sciences. The notion that we should interfere with atypical gender behavior - especially based on prejudicial and outmoded ideas of gender identity - is potentially very dangerous for kids."

The Nicolosis suggest that parents replace toys, games, and articles of clothing that are not specific to their child's gender. They stress the importance of "extinguishing feminine behavior" in boys with "gentle and consistent disapproval." And they say parents should also watch out for tomboys.

"In and of itself, a girl who wants to wear blue jeans and climb trees is not a cause of concern," said Nicolosi. "But the pre-lesbian condition includes stereotypic rejection of femininity, only wearing things that look like a boy's, being emotionally detached from the mother, wanting to play only with boys."

Gay rights supporters have dismissed the book as simply the latest salvo in the ongoing, rancorous debate over homosexuality.

"They used to try to save society from gay people, like in the late 1980s saying that gays should be quarantined if they had AIDS," said Besen. "Then in the Nineties, there were people like Fred Phelps, the minister of God Hates Fags, with the idea that fire and brimstone and condemnation was the answer. And now their line is: 'We love gay people. We're simply trying to save them from themselves.' It's the same message, just in a prettier package."

Of course, not everyone agrees. The book carries a long list of endorsements from leaders in the traditional family values movement, who welcome it as a refreshing addition to a world they view as both too prescriptive and too lenient. The well-known radio evangelist James Dobson has called the book the "very best resource for parents and teachers."

"In our culture, boys can't be boys anymore," said Frances Edwards, a Ridgewood mother of children aged 10, 9, and 4. "Traditional boyish pranks are now viewed as psychosis or a crime. They're put on Ritalin and told they have to behave a certain way. There's a lot of pressure in our society to feminize boys and of course that's going to have an impact on a certain percentage of them."

Jim Slagter, a Wayne father of an 18-year-old boy and 15-year-old daughter, has always been amused at the ways his kids entertained themselves during car rides - his son making car and gun noises, his daughter singing and talking to her dolls.

"I agree with efforts not to encourage anything that might lead to homosexual behavior, primarily because I believe it would not be a happy life," Slagter said. "My wife and I have always tried to be conscious not to smother our son with too much protection. We have tried to find a balance. We wanted him to grow up to be tough enough to be a ... well, to be a man."

Little of the political debate resonates with parents who have come to accept their children's homosexuality. Though they agree with Nicolosi's assertion that lesbians and gays are sometimes distraught over their orientation, they say it's only because they fear a hostile reception.

"My daughter would have been very happy at one point not to be gay," said Lillian Epstein, a Park Ridge mother whose children are now grown. "Going through high school, college, her first years as a lawyer, those were difficult years. She was terrified of being found out, of being fired. She had to live a life of lies. When she came out to us, 25 years ago, I wondered, like every parent does: What did I do wrong? Did I send her to the wrong college? Was it too liberal?

"In the beginning, when you learn your child is gay, you think you should bring your child to therapy so they can change. But parents have to realize that it's their own expectations that have to change. Eventually, you move beyond accepting, to the point where you cherish their uniqueness and admire their courage."

[gcruse] Tomboys may grow up to be perfectly hetero girls.

[Clint N. Suhks] Oh? They “may” but research show it’s likely that they won’t.

I always liked tomboys myself -- they were straight with you, none of that incipient preciousness and indirection -- and they did cool stuff with you, like catching frogs.

Doubtless some tomboys become lesbians, or were lesbians, but I know a few who never were, and they're still likable people. A straight woman who's straight with you is man's best friend, IMHO -- no offense to the faithful pooch.

Heaven forbid that we raise our boys to be boys and girls to be girls. There is a reason God destoyed Soddom and Gamorrah, as well as homosexuality being spoken about as sin in the New Testament. This "everybody is alright with me" philosophy makes me sick. I am glad someone with morals and common sense is being heard nationally.

I figure if you show them a normal male/female relationship they'll turn out okay. I also think that if you love and support your children, then they will turn out fine. Of course, my kids are only 6 and 8, so I don't know what they will be like in 10 or 20 years.

I agree, with a couple of caveats: You also have to actively teach them what's normal, point out how much of our society is not normal, and keep them out of the clutches of the NEA and popular culture. And they have to have a healthy, loving relationship from their parents, especially from the dad.

"His ideas sound like they're from the 1950s,"
It certainly wasn't a bad time in the country.

As long as you're lurking here, do you have anything to say to the many FReepers who want you to step down as Majority Leader?

I agree, with a couple of caveats: You also have to actively teach them what's normal, point out how much of our society is not normal, and keep them out of the clutches of the NEA and popular culture. And they have to have a healthy, loving relationship from their parents, especially from the dad.

Well said, bpf. Boys naturally pull away from reliance on their mothers as they approach puberty, and they need a strong, masculine and loving presence from their fathers to help teach them how to be men - and how to be around men (in the normal way). And, as you say, both parents have to teach their kids to resist the abundant perversity in our society. Boy Scouts and sports, in particular, have helped our sons in this process - where they learn from older boys and other fathers - in addition to what they learn from me.

Oh, piffle. The real cause of the problem was identified almost forty years ago:

Ripper: You know when fluoridation first began?
Mandrake: Ah, no; no, I don't Jack.
Ripper: Nineteen hundred and forty-six. Nineteen forty-six, Mandrake. How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh? Its incredibly obvious, isn't it. A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works.
Mandrake: Uh, Jack... Jack, listen, tell me, tell me, Jack. When did you first become... well, develop this theory?
Ripper: Well, I, uh... I... I... first became aware of it, Mandrake, during the physical act of love.
Mandrake: Hmm.
Ripper: Yes, a uh, a profound sense of fatigue... a feeling of emptiness followed. Luckily I... I was able to interpret these feelings correctly. Loss of essence.
Mandrake: Hmm.
Ripper: I can assure you that it has not recurred, Mandrake. Women uh...women sense my power and they seek the life essence. I do not avoid women, Mandrake.
Mandrake: No.
Ripper: But I...I do deny them my essence.

"Building a bridge to the nineteenth century."

More like building a bridge back to God's proscribed plan of order in His universe. That which is "new" is not good just because it's "new."

Frankly, "conservatives" are people who by nature resist change merely for the sake of change, and who certainly resist moral decay and societally destructive deviancy.

If one doesn't ascribe to these concepts, on cannot be a true conservative. This site was created for conservatives. This world was created for those who would obey God.

Those who do not obey Him will find this out the hard way. Why do you think that there is such an unusually high suicide rate among homosexuals? Because they are happy with the life-choice they've made?

Why do you think homosexuality is so repugnant to moral, heterosexual individuals? Because it's "just another choice," and it's "okay?"

Comparing teaching our children Biblically correct life-choices to "foot-binding" is just another symptom of a deathly ill and crumbling society. Nice work.

Yes, there were bad things that occurred in the 50s, but there were terrific things too. The economy was such that women could afford to stay home with kids. There was much less filth spread around society in the form of profanity, porn and downright laciviousness.

Are we now the self-appointed hall monitor? Apparently the first amendment is just for other people. I thought it eloquently visualized steve-b’s sexual orientation. I didn’t know you’re soooo… sensitive, it seems pretty silly for a pro-sodomy cheerleader.

It's amazing though. My 5 year old daughter loves dolls and dress up. My almost 2 year old son has a passion for trucks, cars, tools, loud noises (he goes bonkers when I vaccuum and runs around making a raspy noise in his throat in imitation) and anything he can bang. He is ALL boy, and we did nothing to foster it (in fact I tend to discourage the banging whenever possible). My daughter is quite a girl too. In fact, my husband and I were going over her Christmas stuff and what she asked for and he complained "But it's all, well, DOLL STUFF!" Uh babe...she's a girl and it's what she wants. :)

Bottom line is, while not every household is as typical as mine, there are distinct, documentable differences between the two sexes. Denying THAT, imo, is what causes most of the confusion.

There is a great deal of evidence that homosexuality(especially for men) comes primarily from these things: 1) longing for male (especially) fatherly love in life; 2) male peer rejection and an inability to relate to same-age males; 3) being homosexually molested as a teen; and 4) fear of females. This book runs along the line of these hypotheses. I suspect that there is a great deal of truth presented in this book, and that it is an honest attempt to help parents prevent a severe and often disastrous disorder from developing. I don't think there are many (if any) parents who want their kids to become homosexual. Parents would do well to read this book.

nothing to do with a private forum.

And nothing to do with you either, right? I’ll bet you were the tattletale in school who constantly told the teacher, for self-serving purposes, Johnny said a bad word. Am I right?

Or in this case, Johnny said the objective truth.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.