By Paul Varnell

I recently wrote that I agreed with the principle that people have—or should have—a right to control their own bodies and pointed to several examples of controversial activities that this basic principle would include, such as abortion, drug use, S/M, assisted suicide, prostitution and “ex-gay” therapy.

My point was that if you assert people’s right to control their own bodies (so long as they do not directly harm someone else) as a basic principle to defend any of these then you are stuck with defending their right to do whatever else they want to with their own bodies, even if you disapprove of those activities or think they are harmful. You cannot pick and choose—or else people’s right to control their own bodies is not a basic principle you can appeal to and must be supplemented in each case with other argument.

This is good John Stuart Mill. Doesn’t anyone read “On Liberty” anymore? And it is the whole point of the rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” that Thomas Jefferson stated as the goal of the United States in the Declaration of Independence. Not happiness itself, please note, but the freedom to pursue happiness, however understood.

Leaving other issues aside for another time, some people seemed surprised by my inclusion of “ex-gay” therapy. After all, we can be pretty sure that it doesn’t work, is based on a false model of why people are homosexual, is motivated by anti-gay religious doctrine and a desire for social conformity, encourages people to adopt an inauthentic, self-deceptive “identity” and involves living a kind of lie. Furthermore when it fails to work it may cause feelings of personal failure, shame, and guilt.

Even so, I would argue, some people seem to be so unhappy about their homosexual feelings that they should try it if they want to. They may feel ashamed of their feelings and guilt-ridden about their desires, feel they are sinful, engage in self-destructive behavior and even suicidal thoughts.

If we are not in a position to change their deplorable religious beliefs or free them from a desire for social conformity, then we are hardly in a position to advise them not to try the only thing they know. Not trying it may be more painful for them than trying it.

Furthermore, for some people the struggle to overcome homosexual feelings, no matter how unsuccessful or illusory, may provide a kind of pleasure in itself. It can give people the satisfying feeling that they are trying to get right with their god and/or their family and society. If the process is a painful struggle, they can offer up their emotional pain as a kind of proof to their god or their family of how hard they are trying. The more painful the struggle the more credit they think they will deserve. Ultimately, the struggle itself may be the point. It can provide a sense of meaning and purpose for a person whose life may otherwise lack one.

Then too, the struggle to change, no matter how unsuccessful, can make life intensely interesting and involving as people constantly try to avoid “temptation,” try to have feelings they do not have, try not to like what they like. We all know people who live their lives in constant emotional disequilibrium and seem to need the turmoil. This is an unusually effective source of turmoil because sexuality and sexual imagery are omnipresent in our culture. Trying to become “ex-gay” makes people the star of their own personal drama. And for religious people it involves a person in a cosmic struggle between good and evil.

Then too, actively trying to become ex-gay—going to meetings, support groups and therapy session—is a highly intriguing way for people to stay in touch with homosexuality even while convincing themselves that they are trying to stop. It involves discussing it, focusing on it, fondling it, so to speak. They go to sessions with other “ex-gays” and the sessions may be led by another “ex-gay.” It is little wonder so many people claiming to have successfully become “ex-gay” continue to be involved with “ex-gay” programs instead of just going off to live their lives happily, leaving all thoughts of homosexuality behind.

So even though “ex-gay” therapy doesn’t work, let them try it. If it isn’t right for them they’ll drop out, as most do. If the “therapy” serves some sort of valuable psychological function for some people—even if not its advertised function—why deprive them of it? And if some people manage to convince themselves that they have reduced their homosexual desires and increased their heterosexual desires, well, it is far from the only case in which people find happiness in a delusion. It’s still a free country.

Some of Paul Varnell’s previous columns are posted at the Independent Gay Forum (www.indegayforum.org). His e-mail address is pvarnell@aol.com.