23 August 2002
Butterfly Kisses has moved to a new address.
bkisses@ziplip.com
Posted on 07/22/2002 7:57:27 AM PDT by scripter
This is the cached version of their homepage on Google. Its links get you into the rest of the site. (And it's a pretty sick and twisted site, BTW. Don't go there if you're easily offended.)
Oh well
I respectfully disagree, it’s the ages between 8 and puberty where homosexuals are more likely to abuse children, this age is well within the definition of pedophilia. However, definitions aside, it’s ludicrous to distinguish between pedo/ephebo philia unless they are seeking therapy; discerning the differences between bestiality, incest and homosexuality would be equally as meaningless. The APA removed homosexuality from the DSM III as a disorder if the patient has good psychosocial functioning, showed positive well-being and had no anxiety related distress, how many pedophiles do you think can pass that kind of diagnosis?
homosexual APA members who have taken care to dominate the appropriate committees and control its message on homosexuality
Ah yes, the self-serving division 44 where the inmates are running the asylum. I did an impromptu check on their members, out of 15 investigations, 10 were openly homosexual. Division 44 is in charge of making APA policy on homosexuality, there’s a conflict of interest when the committee is disproportionately homosexual.
Yes because homosexuals are more likely to be pedophiles. See Freund Watson 1992.
The A.P.A. Normalization of Homosexuality, and the Research Study of Irving Bieber
"Dr. Bieber was one of the key participants in the historical debate which culminated in the 1973 decision to remove homosexuality from the psychiatric manual.
His paper describes psychiatry's attempt to adopt a new "adaptational" perspective of normality. During this time, the profession was beginning to sever itself from established clinical theory--particularly psychoanalytic theories of unconscious motivation--claiming that if we do not readily see "distress, disability and disadvantage" in a particular psychological condition, then the condition is not disordered.
On first consideration, such a theory sounds plausible. However we see its startling consequences when we apply it to a condition such as pedophilia. Is the happy and otherwise well-functioning pedophile "normal"? As Dr. Bieber argues in this article, psychopathology can be ego-syntonic and not cause distress; and social effectiveness-‹that is, the ability to maintain positive social relations and perform work effectively--"may coexist with psychopathology, in some cases even of a psychotic order."...
Dr. Bieber describes the deletion of homosexuality from the American Psychiatric Association's diagnostic and statistical manual as "the climax of a sociopolitical struggle involving what were deemed to be the rights of homosexuals."
Gay activist groups believed that prejudice against homosexuals could be extinguished only if, as homosexuals, they were accepted as normal. "They claimed that homosexuality is a preference, an orientation, a propensity; that it is neither a defect, a disturbance, a sickness, nor a malfunction of any sort." To promote this aim, Dr. Bieber reports, "Gay activists impugned the motives and ridiculed the work of those psychiatrists who asserted that homosexuality is other than normal."
A task force was set up to study homosexuality, but the members chosen included not a single psychiatrist who held the view that homosexuality was not a normal adaptation. There followed riots at scientific meetings by gay activists who increased the pressure on the Psychiatric Association.
Will preventive therapy for homosexuality be prohibited, Dr. Bieber wondered, when homosexuality is normalized?
Furthermmore-‹is it the proper domain of psychiatry to remove diagnoses to eliminate prejudice?
Dr. Bieber pointed out that there were several other conditions in the DSM-II that did not fulfill the "distress and social disability" criteria: voyeurism, fetishism, sexual sadism, and masochism. A.P.A.'s Dr. Spitzer replied that these conditions should perhaps also be removed from the DSM-II -- and that if the sadists and fetishists were to organize as did the gay activists, they, too, might find their conditions normalized.
Summary
The factors that determined the decision of the APA to delete homosexuality from DSM-II were summarized as follows:
- Gay activists had a profound influence on psychiatric thinking.
- A sincere belief was held by liberal-minded and compassionate psychiatrists that listing homosexuality as a psychiatric disorder supported and reinforced prejudice against homosexuals. Removal of the term from the diagnostic manual was viewed as a humane, progressive act.
- There was an acceptance of new criteria to define psychiatric conditions. Only those disorders that caused a patient to suffer or that resulted in adjustment problems were thought to be appropriate for inclusion in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual.
Although late, some may find the following report from Culture Wars magazine interesting. It concerns Daniel Cohn-Bendit, the "Abbe Hoffman" of France, and a major figure in the revolutions of '68.
In a discussion which took place on Germany's second TV channel not too long ago, the former comrade in arms of Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer and current French(!) "Green" delegate to the European Senate, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, was suddenly confronted with his past as a revolutionary of the '68 period as well as his former activities as "pedagoue" in a left-wing, alternative, red Kindergarten. It was the return of a past that allowed a closer look at what has come to be known as the '68 movement.'
The topic isn't pleasant. We're talking about ideologically motivated social experiments with children in the one area where it's possible to damage them the most. .... In the dogmatic certainty which the Marxist gospel provided as a blueprint for changing society, they [the revolutionaries of '68 used children as experimental guinea pigs in the sensitive area of sexual development.....We're dealing with the topic because it makes clear just how the irresponsible behavior of people like Cohn-Bendit can now be found in the highest offices in both Germany and Austria [and I'm sure many other countries], and how these people dominate public discussion in both countries. These same piople are quick to attack anyone who disagrees with them as fascists. These same people will find this retrospective on 1968 a source of infamy.
[The following exchange on German TV makes clear what the author means by "infamy."]
ZDF: Was Daniel ever employed as a teacher in one of red day care centers?
Daniel: Yes, of course, of course.
ZDF: Did he publish the following text about his experiences in the day care center: "It often happened to me that children would unzip my fly and begin to fondle me."
At that point the eloquent European Parliamentarian had the look of a deer caught in the headlights of an oncoming car. Daniel suddenly found himself in the lion's den, observed by millions of TV viewers. What Cohn-Bendit then stammered out deserves to be quoted in extenso:
Daniel: Nothing real happened, but it sounds so real.
ZDF: You sound like the day care center Bukowski in this text! (Charles Bukowski is an American author who gives very graphic descriptions of his diverse sex life.)
Daniel: Yes, but that's the problem, that I believed, if I were to only in an abstract manner...then you discuss and then you don't discuss it. And in this situation I have attempted to create a history out of the various situations and occurrences that were part of the discussion in the day care center, things that I observed in part, by using the first person pronoun, saying things that, uh, I'm happy to discuss, in other words, yes.
ZDF: How do you explain the writing of such a text to your 10-year-old son?
Daniel: Yes, I have other problems. Yes, exactly. How do I discuss things like abortion with my 10-year-old son. For example, I want...so in other words, I want women to have these rights.
ZDF: Yes, but ultimately we still have to ask how do you explain this to him?
Daniel: Yes, if my 10-year-old son were to read this text, then I would explain the situation, explain the situation, to him precisely by saying that things like this were being discussed back then. And you know, it's the same with teachers nowadays, how do you explain to your 10-year-old son, who wants to get into the bathtub with you? Yes, or this, yes, you have to say something, yes or no in some form. These are real problems....
Britain's Guardian did an article which can be reached here. Don't have a German language link at the moment. (Oh, but to have this exchange on videotape!!!)
23 August 2002
Butterfly Kisses has moved to a new address.
bkisses@ziplip.com
They appear to have a new email address at a security company with a contact name in Mountain View, CA. Looks like their site is gone for now. That's a good thing!
Administrative Contact:
Srinivasan, Arvind asrinivasan@ziplip.com
1265 Montecito Avenue
Suite 106
Mountain View, CA 94043
US
650.968.8989
650.968.9089
Technical Contact:
Admin, DNS dns-admin@ziplip.com
1265 Montecito Avenue
Suite 106
Mountain View, CA 94043
US
650.968.8989
650.968.9089
The way the homosexuals went after Dr. Laura's sponsors gives me some ideas here with ziplip.com...
David Ehrenstein, a gay fascist propagandist and Hollywood film critic (and self-appointed persecutor of magazine editor Andrew Sullivan), has written a book on the overthrow of the APA. He of course took another point of view, but in between his agitprop-terrorist fulminations on Salon's "TableTalk", his pride of authorship led him to divulge the method by which the APA was turned.
It seems that the principal investigators of homosexuality were, some of them, themselves gay. Gay-rights spear-carriers went to these people and offered to "out" them if they failed to see the light and support the new position rallying around the famous study that laid down the new rationale you outlined for "discovering" that homosexuality was not a paraphilia and not a disorder, if other mental-health criteria were satisfied.
So in short, major support was gathered for the DSM-3 rewrite via plain old blackmail.
Ehrenstein was eloquent in his disgust for gay psychiatrists who were engaged in psychotherapy work on other gays to attempt to reorient them. He said that he felt that it was a) hypocritical of them and b) deeply cynical of them to accept pay and emoluments for doing what the straight community wanted done "to" other gays.
Ehrenstein is a gay essentialist who believes it is the duty of the gay psychiatrist or psychologist to assist the embryonic gay in his development and self-realization. Ehrenstein didn't share his opinion of the practice described by the street phrase, "skinning some chicken".
So under the criteria accepted for DSM-3, an otherwise well-adjusted pyromaniac could not be ethically treated against his will.
Sounds good to me.
rallying around the famous study that laid down the new rationale
Are you talking about the Hooker Study? I’m not aware of any other studies other than a vote from the board of trustees, Sabshin, Spitzer, et al followed by a vote of only 58% from the APA (psychiatric) general body in 74’.
Ehrenstein didn't mention any names in his post to me. I don't know, not having read his book, whether he used any names in his book on the subject. I'm not sure even which book he discussed it in, but it was most likely Open Secrets: Gay Hollywood, 1928-2000.
Here is David Ehrenstein's post to me on Salon "TableTalk"'s thread, which is the Dr. Laura Schlessinger thread now in their "Social Issues/ Attic" folder:
David Ehrenstein - 07:28 am Pacific Time - May 24, 2000 - #276 of 867
Someday Andrew Sullivan's Gonna End.
What "older professional opinion" are you talking about? Are you aware of the history of psychiatry re gays and lesbians? Talk about "wiggle room"!
Until 1973, when gay activists forced the establishment to change course (thanks in no small part to pressure exerted on the closet queens who were a mainstay of said establishment) gays and lesbians were a cash cow. "Dr." Laura is disinclined to regad those udders as having run dry. And she is joined in this by Janet Parshall and the usual suspects.
That is the quote. As for the names of individual "closeted gays", he mentioned the names of Harry Stack Sullivan and Donald Webster Cory in another post following this one. He never gave me any particulars about Cory, but on a different thread (which, having spent about six hours excavating that last post, I think I'll refrain from trying to research) he said that Sullivan had made a living giving psychotherapy to other gays including aversion therapy for their homosexuality. Ehrenstein made it clear that he felt that Sullivan's motives were venal, cynical, and deeply immoral, given Sullivan's own homosexuality.
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.