Sick for the Cure

From the BBC:

Ann Widdecombe has come under fire after she suggested science could “produce an answer” to being gay.

In an interview on Sky News, the newly elected Brexit Party MEP was asked about previous comments she made concerning gay conversion therapy.

She said she had “pointed out that there was a time when it was thought impossible for men to become women”.

Labour MP Luke Pollard said Ms Widdecombe was “continuing her sick anti-LGBT campaign”.

I can’t be bothered to look at what Widdecombe actually said, but I’d put a hundred quid on her words being twisted by the media so the ranks of the permanently offended and grifting MPs like Luke Pollard have something to be outraged about.

What would be interesting, though, is how many gay men and women would choose to take a “cure” for homosexuality if one existed. In his recent interview with Jordan Peterson, Milo Yiannopoulos said he wishes there had been a simple cure for his own homosexuality because it would have made his teenage years much easier to bear. I am sure he is not alone, and I suspect there is a large number of married men who wish they could suppress the homosexual urges which threaten to destroy their family. If a simple and effective “cure” could be found, I think it would prove extremely popular among both men and women, even in the enlightened west.

But I am equally sure that if such a cure were discovered the LGBT lobby would fight tooth and nail for it to be banned, denying it to those who would prefer to live a straight life. You can get a hint of the underlying attitudes in tweets like this:


Who’s this we, then? Now I can understand the reaction of gays to anything which smacks of “conversion therapy”, but if men can supposedly undergo treatment to become women and vice versa it’s hardly beyond the realms of science to come up with a cure for homosexuality, particularly for those who aren’t too far along the spectrum. Unless this is forced on people I don’t see why it’s a bad thing, let alone discussion of it.

The answer, of course, is the LGBT movement is nowadays a political movement seeking power, money, and privilege at the expense of everyone else. If something comes along to thin their ranks of unwilling footsoldiers, they’ll naturally oppose it. This stopped being about freedom a long time ago.

Liked it? Take a second to support Tim Newman on Patreon!
Share

31 thoughts on “Sick for the Cure

  1. The most interesting – and lamentable – aspect of the inevitable reaction has been the utter lack of intellectual curiosity into the exact nature of homosexuality. It’s not genetic. It’s not cultural. It’s something. But what? Most likely right now seems to be that it is caused by the incomprehensibly complex interplay of hormones and chemicals that a developing foetus bathes in. We’re pretty sure that autism is caused in this fashion, for example.
    If we really, really understood homosexuality. If we knew exactly what causes it and could predict reliably who will mature into an adult homosexual – would this be a bad thing? And if we got to that point would being able to change the outcome be a bad thing? Or simply another freedom for people to choose from or not as they wish?

  2. Justine Greening: “We don’t need a cure for love” .

    Amen, Justine. But do we need a cure for certain types of sexual desire and expression? What about loving a bit of upskirting, or getting off on using power to grope and talk dirty to vulnerable employees?

    Talking about “love” makes everything sound noble and almost religious. What about obsessively meeting with random strangers to ejaculate in or on them?

  3. From what I’ve read, there are two predictors for a bloke being gay. Firstly is there anyone gay in the family. Secondly the number of older brothers his mum carried. Which suggests conversion therapy is unlikely to work.

    That said I once caused a few heart attacks by pointing out that the West was likely to have fewer gay men per capita than other less tolerant societies, partly because of the smaller family size but also because gay couples tend to remove themselves from the gene pool.

  4. Cynic: Homosexuality is not genetic. It’d be a compete evolutionary dead end if it were. Any normal human society seems to produce about 1% to 2% of its population as homosexuals. We don’t know exactly why or how.

  5. “Cure” is a pretty shoddy word here, I think. Though wasn’t so long ago that homosexuality had an ICD code, which just shows how much social construction goes into definitions of mental health and cultural change can make them look very dated, very quickly. It also often leaves the older generation, who grew up in a different cultural environment, looking very out of touch. Or vice versa, from their point of view, leaves the youngsters looking quite incomprehensible.

    I think a future is certainly imaginable in which desires and drives of all kinds (not just sexual) are technologically manipulable, but I’m not so sure that it would be us plebs (or our descendants) who will hold the levers over our own.

  6. In the future, parents will apparently be able to make prenatal adjustments to their child’s genetic code. Among other consequences, this will lead to the near-eradication of various congenital medical problems.

    If homosexuality is genetic – and the LGBT movement insists that it is – then it can eventually be eradicated the same way.

    If life as a homosexual is harder than as a heterosexual – and the LGBT movement insists that it is – then any decent parent would delete the “gay gene” from their child’s DNA.

    Those dots are pretty easy to connect, so a lot more people will probably connect them in future. (Maybe that’s what Widdecombe was doing.) If that’s offensive to the LGBT movement, the best course of action would be to stop pretending that homosexuality is genetic.

  7. @ Patrick:

    Cynic: Homosexuality is not genetic. It’d be a compete evolutionary dead end if it were.

    It could be one of these things where having one copy of the gene is beneficial in some way, and having two copies makes you gay. A bit like that sickle-cell anaemia gene: one copy makes you resistant to malaria, two give you a nasty blood disease.

  8. Ever consider that people might be looking at homosexuality from entirely the wrong direction. There’s nothing intrinsically aberrant about being sexually attracted to the same sex. It maximises the opportunity for fun. It’s not being sexually attracted to the opposite sex is the problematic deviance. And exclusive heterosexuality is a less than optimum behaviour?

  9. @Patrick

    Assuming homosexuals don’t breed.

    How many people have lived normal lives
    begatting children left right and centre despite being as bent as nine bob notes? Until very recently, the only way was as nature intended.

    Just because somebody is homosexual doesn’t mean the urge to spread ones genes isn’t there.

    Homosexuality is what you are and the reasonable majority have no problem with it. But if there was a “cure” I also would be fascinated to see how many would take it. Particularly as it can no longer just be anymore. Particularly given that it has been politicised and weaponized along with all the other “isms” and “alities”

  10. Mark and BiS – I think you’re right about reproduction. I have been meaning exclusively homosexual when discussing it above. That would be a dead end. But being gay and nonetheless doing ones duty with a member of the opposite sex (ie bisexual) obviously leaves open the route for genetic inheritance. But…personally I do not think homosexuality has genetic origins so much as developmental. Nature seems to require it – as you could take a 100% straight population off to an island and within 1 generation you’d have gay people too. I’m genuinely fascinated to know what evolutionary or socio-evolutionary purpose it serves. For chimps and dolphins and dogs just as much as for humans. Maybe eliminating gayness would harm us in some way. The first step is clearly to understand exactly what it is.

  11. Am I recalling correctly that Jack Ashley MP copped criticism from the deaf lobbyists for having a cochlear implant when it became available?

    Seems analogous.

  12. And exclusive heterosexuality is a less than optimum behaviour?

    I don’t know, but anecdotal experience tells me bisexuals – especially women – are serial attention-seekers with mental issues. For example:

    I’ve written about this airhead before.

  13. Am I recalling correctly that Jack Ashley MP copped criticism from the deaf lobbyists for having a cochlear implant when it became available?

    Yes, that’s an excellent data point: there are disabled lobby groups who oppose the use of hearing aids.

  14. On the subject – Why is there such a strong correlation between campness and homosexuality?

    Now there are plenty of gay men who aren’t camp and you find the odd straight men who is camp but otherwise it’s usually a good indicator of how someone swings.

    I think much homophobia isn’t about being gay per se, rather people just don’t like overly camp people.

  15. Would it be OK to cure paedophilia? It’s hard to know these days.

  16. Homosexuality is not genetic
    There are some things genetic which are deterministic but most things aren’t. There was a study looking at all the twins in Sweden about 10 years ago that concluded “.. in men, genetic effects explained .34–.39 of the variance…”.

    For me the interesting predictor is the birth order one, which had me going WTF. The key thing is the number of older brothers the mum has carried not the number the bloke grew up with. It’s been proposed that the mechanism is the mother’s immune response to a particular protein which seems plausible.

  17. Depends what is genetic/behavioural and what “proportion” of the overall this covers.

    Could it be that genetics/behaviour which evolved for one reason and served some useful purpose for tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of years in “the wild” manifests itself as homosexuality (or a bias towards) in settled societies?

    I think we carry all sorts of genetic/behavioural baggage.

  18. I’m not saying it’s all about the Peterborough by-election but…

    The Brexit Party threatens the establishment so let’s drag one of their MEPs onto the programme, dig up something ‘controversial’ she said years ago and then create a big stink about it.

    As for whether homosexuality is genetic, there is an argument that aunts and uncles who don’t have children of their own contribute by helping provide for the rest of the family so maybe a certain percentage of non-breeders is useful in propagating a particular genetic line and so evolution randomly supplies some in each generation.

    Of course these days, the most vociferous gays are also the most anti human and they hate breeders anyway so perhaps that theory no longer holds water.

  19. “I don’t know, but anecdotal experience tells me bisexuals – especially women – are serial attention-seekers with mental issues.”
    Said this to you before, Tim, the anecdotal evidence tends to come from the sort of people make their sexuality a matter of public concern. That’s hardly a normal behaviour to start with. To make a success of being bi or you’re other bete noire, polyamorous, requires a degree of self confidence & being comfortable with yourself. That’s hardly the sort of person going to parading their lifestyle in newspaper columns or on Twatter (As far as I’m concerned, just being on Twatter demonstrates a severe person problem.. Why would any normal, well adjusted person want to do that?) More likely they just get on with it & enjoy it without sharing it with all & sundry. They don’t regard it a somehow defining them.

  20. I think BiS is on the right track. Your classical Greeks did not have a concept of ‘gayness’ (or straightness for that matter). It was accepted that a Greek citizen would have sex with both men and women, and marry and sire children.

    As a genuinely patriarchal society, it didn’t have much truck with women at all, so there were many men who married to do their duty and have sons, but had more significant relationships with men.

    I doubt the ancient Greeks were any more or less gay than us, but they shagged more blokes. That suggests it is a social thing.

    Matthew Parris wrote in the Times a little while back that if he’d grown up in a society where chap-on-chap was frowned on, he’d have cheerfully got married and done as society required and not agonised about it too much.

  21. Embrace the power of “and”.

    Homosexuality is a complex behaviour, and the notion that it is entirely developmental or entirely genetic or entirely choice is almost certainly wrong.

    Just to muddy the waters, start looking into the number of gay/lesbian people that were sexually abused as children.

  22. Could it be that genetics/behaviour which evolved for one reason and served some useful purpose for tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of years in “the wild” manifests itself as homosexuality (or a bias towards) in settled societies?

    Hypothesis:

    Greater male fecundity means that a small number of exceptionally violent alpha males can hog all the women if they want.

    Any new man in such a group constitutes a threat to the alpha males – perhaps witness chimpanzee alphas killing younger males, and eventually being killed in turn when they’re no longer strong enough.

    A woman does not constitute a threat.

    So perhaps that’s selection pressure for femininity: being a woman drastically increases your odds of surviving to adulthood and procreation, and if you can’t actually be a woman you can at least be an effeminate man, posing no obvious threat to the alpha males.

    Or maybe not.

  23. Interesting point Tim and an aspect that hadn’t occurred to me.

    I think these people are only interested in the right kind of progress (that which advances their political cause), the right kind of freedom (one they agree with) and the right kind of happiness (actually they don’t care about anybody’s happiness, barely even their own).

  24. Said this to you before, Tim, the anecdotal evidence tends to come from the sort of people make their sexuality a matter of public concern. That’s hardly a normal behaviour to start with.

    Yes, fair point.

  25. “We don’t need a cure for love”

    With such comprehensive mastery for vacuity, why isn’t Justine Greening standing for leadership of the Conservative Party?

  26. The gays have long used the racism analogy. It’s ridiculous and/or offensive to suggest “curing” a black person; ergo it’s wrong to suggest curing homosexuality. But the analogy is patently absurd, for all the reasons given by your readers.

    MC’s point about Matthew Parris is important. If you live in an environment which tolerates sexual deviancy, then you can expect more of it. If the environment actively celebrates it (June is Pride Month, as HR reminded me this morning) then you’ll get even more of it.

  27. I’d put a hundred quid on her words being twisted by the media so the ranks of the permanently offended and grifting MPs like Luke Pollard have something to be outraged about

    Any bookies taking that? Probably not.

    If a simple and effective “cure” could be found, I think it would prove extremely popular among both men and women, even in the enlightened west.

    Agree

    am equally sure that if such a cure were discovered the LGBT lobby would fight tooth and nail for it to be banned, denying it to those who would prefer to live a straight life

    Too true

    .
    Widdecombe: Science may ‘produce an answer’ to homosexuality – Sky News
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrMYUu38BT0 – @6m53s “In 2012 you wrote…” – misrepresented? Yes

    vs

    Ann Widdecombe completely destroys sky news host on liveTv
    youtube.com/watch?v=m57PbHz34eU – same vid

  28. @Tim Newman on June 3, 2019 at 1:24 pm said:

    Yes, that’s an excellent data point: there are disabled lobby groups who oppose the use of hearing aids.

    Last year two hereditary (dominant) disabled parents were suing a school for something hospital related about their hereditary disabled child.

    My thought was “Evil scum, why do you want to inflict wheelchair bound from age 5/10 for life on your child? It’s cruel”

    @clem

    people just don’t like overly camp people.

    I loathe the camp “accent” so many adopt, talk normally you gay idiot.

    @Kevin B on June 3, 2019 at 2:36 pm

    +1

Comments are closed.