![2[1].jpg](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/5abadf_f310244424a443b29215dadb17bba49b~mv2.jpg/v1/crop/x_5,y_0,w_1069,h_1080/fill/w_101,h_102,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_avif,quality_auto/2%5B1%5D.jpg)
By Beck Heslop
In the aftermath of Pride Month, which saw your Facebook timeline flooded with supportive posts, companies sponsoring LGBT charities and people waving their rainbow flags, the horrors of conversion therapy may seem like a relic of the past.
After all, the practice has changed over the years. Seventy years ago, one popular method was lobotomy, popularised by American psychiatrist Walter Freeman who left many of his patients disabled after operating on over one thousand homosexual individuals. Fortunately, such extreme techniques have been phased out. However, rather than being eradicated in its entirety, conversion therapy has simply taken on other forms which are harmful in different ways.
Although lobotomies are no longer performed on LGBT individuals, conversion therapy still pathologises non-straight sexualities and transgender identities.
Many providers avoid using the term conversion therapy due the aforementioned connotations. Instead, they choose to rebrand it as Change-Orientated Therapy (COT), counselling for sexual brokenness, or reparative therapy. These alternatives largely refer to the behavioural modification and psychoanalytic approaches more commonly practiced in Western countries today. Advocates claim that these offer an alternative to the more overtly harmful reorientation practices, and should remain available for individuals who are struggling with their sexuality.
These practitioners use a number of psychologically damaging techniques. Aversive conditioning techniques range from receiving electrical shocks or nausea-inducing drugs at the same time as looking at same-sex erotic images, to imagining being electrocuted or vomiting in response to those same stimuli. Other popular methods include the use of a ‘sex surrogate’ to encourage opposite-sex attraction, masturbatory reconditioning, gender coaching, and talk therapy aimed at locating childhood trauma that may have lead them to be homosexual.
Studies show that self-reported self-hatred and depression increased after having undergone reorientation attempts, especially for religious individuals. In one study of Christians, 21% of participants had attempted to end their own lives at least once during or after orientation therapy. Three were even admitted into psychiatric hospitals for panic attacks and severe suicidality during this time.
"Although some groups are supportive of LGBT rights, religious organisations are still the main providers of and lobbyists for conversion therapy."
Other studies have shown that LGBT+ youth who are rejected by their parents are over eight times more likely to attempt suicide and over three times more likely to contract HIV than those who are accepted. Conversion therapy, in particular, has been liked to suicide, depression, anxiety, substance misuse, and homelessness.
Rather than tackling the stigma around the queer community, these treatments perpetuate the myth that LGBT+ identities are mental illnesses that require ‘fixing’. Thus, adults who seek this treatment and find it ineffective in changing their sexual orientation or gender identity blame themselves and experience a deep sense of shame for their perceived failure. It also reinforces the individual’s belief that they need to be ‘fixed’.
The lack of public attention to this abuse, especially its practice on adults, means that these damaging therapies can take place in the open. In fact, the second result in a Google search for the term brings up ‘reparative therapist’ Joseph Nicolos’ website headed with the phrase ‘you don’t have to be gay’. Although he died in 2017, his estate still profits from selling his books, including A Parent’s Guide to Preventing Homosexuality. At the time of writing, his clinical handbooks for practising conversion therapy are sold out.
One UK provider claims to be concerned about the ‘medical risks’ of same-sex activity for his clients. The increased risk of sexually transmitted disease for these individuals is only a half-truth. LBGT+ youth are half as likely as their heterosexual youth to use condoms and in 2018, men who have sex with men accounted for 66% of HIV cases in the US. Race, however, is another important factor, with black individuals (of any sexual orientation) being almost twice as likely to contract HIV than their white counterparts. A number of structural factors are at play in determining the risk of an infection, including inadequate sex education, restricted access to health care, and unemployment. These are not inherent risks associated with sexual orientation nor race but are a result of social, medical, and educational discrimination.
Additionally, COT places one of its aims as being able to fit in with one’s heterosexual peers. This maintains the idea that heterosexuality is the ‘norm’ and that LGB individuals (referring only to sexual orientation rather than gender) are unable to have platonic and fulfilling relationships with members of the same sex.
A UK survey found that LGBT individuals with a faith background were twice as likely as those from non-faith backgrounds to be offered conversion therapy, with the likelihood doubled again for transgender individuals. Religious organisations are also currently the biggest offenders in this arena - both in providing these services and combatting legislative change that would protect LGBT+ individuals.
For most of the world, the death knell has yet to be rung for these ‘treatments’ that claim to change a person’s sexual orientation. In 2018, the UK government announced its intention to ban the practice, but since 2019, it has fallen from any major party’s manifesto and there are currently no plans to act on this promise. Meanwhile, only 20 US states have passed laws against conversion therapy on minors. Bans are pending in other parts of the world, including Chile where the bill has been sitting unpassed since 2017.
Even where some laws exist, their narrowness makes it permissive. India, Argentina and Fiji all have laws on the books which prevent the diagnosis and subsequent treatment of homosexuality as a mental illness, but these bans only apply to medical professionals. Alternative methods or unregistered psychologists can still engage in this harmful practice. In May 2020, a bisexual Indian girl was found dead after being forced into conversion therapy by her family.
However, there are signs of progress being made. A number of religious groups have made statements condemning the practice, with the European Buddhism Union making an official declaration that ‘Conversion therapy has no place in the modern medical and spiritual world’ and the General Synod for the Church of England admitting that it was ‘potentially harmful’. A number of individual, local religious houses have openly welcomed the LGBT+ into their congregations.
But it is a much broader problem than religious attitudes. Until governments take affirmative action to protect all LGBT+ individuals and the stigma that drives pressure for those individuals to change goes away, the damage done by of conversion therapy, in whatever front it takes, will continue.
Comments