Rating: 
Summary: An Opportunity Perhaps Missed
Review: (1) Regretfully I have to caution that many of the statements in the latter half of the book are factually inaccurate or improbable. The fears of seduction, contagion, slippery-slope maladjustments occurring by homosexuality freely-existing--I do not blat here they are wrong (let alone "bigoted"--improper word), simply deeply questionable. (2) I suggest that these statements do not reflect "science" so much as an implicit world-view, or guiding ideology, of "natural law," precisely that "human nature exists, specifically heterosexual normality among other laws, and to deviate from same will cause personal disorganization and even social danger." Fine as an ideology if you wish, and to be discussed; but please make explicit your own propelling ideologies! (3) The reason all this is regrettable--the infusing of the book with unstated Natural Law absolutistic morality--is simply that the whole issue of "psychopathology and homosexuality" IS a trenchant topic which should be discussed more, and more objectively, than seems possible in today's climate of (needed) gay/lesbian liberation and also of (well-intended, but...) Political Correctness. So I wish Socarides had been able to do so. As it is, read into the book for an example of application of tacit, covert, implicit, unstated Natural-Law philosophy or morality. A truly-balanced view of the subject (avoiding the liberationsts' cheerful refusals to look beyond minority-oppression for causes of problems chez gay males anyhow) remains to be written?.....
Rating:
Summary: This book should be placed in the "Fiction" section
Review: A collection of anti-gay propaganda that would make Goebbels blush, all couched in pseudo-scientific terminology
Rating: 
Summary: Reparative therapist speaks to modern concerns
Review: According to Charles Socarides, all sexual perversions, heterosexual and homosexual, including regressions with an Oedipal component(conflict with the father), can be traced back to an unacceptable primary feminine identification resulting from a separation/individuation crisis with a rejecting or intrusive mother. This means reparative psychology applies equally well both to homosexuals and heterosexuals who retain an unacceptable primary feminine identification, with a regression to sexual perversion. A clarification about homosexual choice: According to reparative therapy, the primary regression to homosexuality occurs so early in development(by age 3 to 4)that it is essentially permanent and intractable at that time. So, in a true sense, there never was a choice in becoming homosexual as a child. Indeed, it is impossible to change sexual orientation later as well, unless the individual first completes the omitted Oedipal development. In point of fact, however, reparative therapy is typically sought out for other distressing reasons, e.g., suicidal reaction to loss of an idealized lover without whom the individual feels he or she cannot maintain a separate existence. At the outset, virtually all homosexuals enter reparative therapy personally convinced that their own homosexuality is inborn and unchangeable, and not developmental and curable. Modern culture is already glaringly visual and sexualized. This is also consistent with Socarides' reparative viewpoint, which, by extension, suggests that today's sexual culture is likely traceable to pre-oedipal failures in development. This raises an ominous ethical question: are there really two separate subclasses of human beings, the Oedipal successes, i.e., those who have successfully completed psychosexual development, including separation and individuation from their mothers and fathers, and the pre-oedipal failures, who haven't? Look at the enormous focus on bodily perfection and idealized youthful looks today. Does this suggest that something is perhaps fundamentally , "reparatively" amiss with our culture? All the focus on aerobics and body enhancements, including plastic surgery, for example, suggests a core disenchantment with our naturalistic humanity in favor of some idealized--and perverse--sexuality. Obsession with the new-style wonder bras are a perfect example, so to speak: they are worn by women not to attract even more, unneccessary men(...)but to repair a defective body-and-gender-image with an idealized, perfected, "reparative" self-image. Socarides' psychoanalysis of the sexual perversions also accounts for bingeing/purging and anorexia as similarly self-reparative of a defective body image and incompletely developed sense of gender. Furthermore, all sex of the sex of the sex industry, including pornography, can be seen as a problem of inappropriate, or pathological distance, traceable to unhealthy patterns of rejecting, or non-involved distancing, or distorted narcissistic intrusion or mirroring on the part of the child's father or mother. Socarides' parental profiles consistently confirm this pattern. From an evolutionary standpoint, beauty itself may also be seen as an adaptation allowing for "faster recognition of maleness/femaleness at a distance". From this view, the sex industry, both gay and heterosexual, is simply an extremized version of "macho" or "ultra-femme" over-compensation, with everyone in flight from an unacceptable or problematic primary feminine identification. For example, males going to sex clubs either alone, in pairs or in groups: 1.each in order to escape his own unconscious homosexual fear of the other males, trying to prove his individual maleness to the other males, while in reality unconsciously avoiding difficult choices and responsibilities of adult heterosexual responsibility and intimacy, 2.each in search of his own lost masculinity at the club, 3.each contrasting himself against over-feminized women who thus make them feel even more assuredly masculine, and 4.each in order to feel less threatened by their own sense of primary feminine identification, which they share with the other men.(The converse pattern is true for the over-feminized sexy waitresses and sex workers, who are likewise trying to prove their femininity against their own broken primary feminine identifications.)Furthermore, it would also be correct to say that male porn consumers are really in unconscious flight from their own primary feminine identification and fears of homosexuality. Although Socarides' theory is purely clinical and applied(as all modern-day psychotherapy and psychiatry)any ultimate theory of human sexuality and origins must be consistent--or at least not contradict-- what we learn about our human/primate past, so anyone or any religion that objects to Darwinian evolution now will certainly automatically reject any scientific theory of human sexuality in the future, leaving such discussion open to "academics only".
Rating:
Summary: yuck
Review: Although the APA has rejected arguments linking homosexuality to mental illness, Socarides continues to labor under the misguided notion that bias can produce excellent social science. Quite the contrary, it impedes the true scientific process. It is neither liberal or elitist to insist that grown scientists adhere to the same ethical standards we require school children to exhbit in their science classes, and merely reflects the internalized anger of this has-been and his followers. The simplistic assumption presumes that hate and misinformation packaged in "clinical sounding" terms must be accepted by the majority of the dominant society. While the material is good for a laugh and to show how enlightened society has become, it should not be confused with serious research or medical advice.
Rating:
Summary: Junk Science from the religious right
Review: As a licensed psychotherapist, I would like to state that aside from "homosexual activists," the mainstream Psychiatric community has debunked Socrides "research" on this book for a number of reasons. An internet search under Socarides, and especially the work of Dr. Gregory Herek, the preeminent social psychologist, points out the flaws in Socarides work, and "conversion therapy" in general. Good science is not based only on antidotal evidence from one's own clinical practice. Subjects were taken from a pool of patients already in conversion therapy. No follow up is provided as to the end result of his "successes". This methology is akin to the 1950's 'study" that proclamed that all convicts had listened to rock and roll, and therefore rock and role must be the root of all criminal behavior. Socarides has aligned himself with the quasi-professionals who are mouthpieces for the evangelical right. These include NARTH, and Dr. Joseph Necalosi, who aside from being disavowed from numerous professional organizations, has only been published in scientic Journal's that must be paid for publication, a scientific "vanity press." Evangelicals will flock to this book only because it reinforces their "agenda" to disprove that homosexuality is a variance of sexual behavior, that is neither pathological, nor ego-dystonic. Dr. Herek's extensive, and award winning research gives the ultimate rebuttal to this somewhat feeble work. That's what real science is about.
Rating: 
Summary: Bias Masquerading as Medicine
Review: Bias Masquerading as Medicine -
A Review of C. Socarides' "Homosexuality: A Freedom Too Far" Charles Socarides, who studied at New York Medical College and Columbia University, is Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City, where for over three decades he has campaigned against greater social acceptance and legal equality for gay and lesbian folk. He defends anti-gay prejudice on the grounds that broad acceptance of homosexuality is "a tempting of social and personal disaster." To promote his ends, he has cooperated with evangelical and orthodox religious advocates and rightist political forces to provide a pseudo-scientific underpinning to what is clearly simple intolerance. He doesn't openly promote a "pogrom" in his present effort "Homosexuality: A Freedom Too Far." Rather, we read: "Stopping bias, persecution and violence against gays is the legitimate and worthy aim of the movement. It errs in demanding a freedom too far, a freedom to alter the basic male-female design. Those who endorse this change will get no thanks from future generations." But Dr. Socarides' "liberality" does not extend back very far in time. His 1978 volume "Homosexuality" - a model of incompetent research methodology and the sloppy use of clinical data - suggests a network of "Federal Sexual Correctional Centers" for homosexuals, who - in his view - need incarceration not simply because of their deviant sexual conduct but as well on account of the fact that, inter alia, they are likely to smoke marijuana and promote radical, left-wing political causes. Socarides offers his foundational analysis: "Some say gays were born that way and others say it's a choice. Few mention a third possibility -- that homosexuality is unconsciously determined in a child's early years, and that we have a practical science in dealing with those unconscious beginnings. It's called psychoanalysis, and it is a science that can bring freedom to those caught up in their compulsions." Citing the desirability of and reasons for change, we read: ""Our male patients did not have good relationships with their fathers. They feared them, and reported excessive fears of injury during childhood. And, while most of them were still terribly dependent on their mothers, down deep, they feared them, too. By extension, they ended up fearing and avoiding all women. But we can free these men, men who must have sex with men, and turn them around so they can love women." The prima facie absurdity of the foregoing paragraph is, I trust, apparent to all unbiased adult readers. Socarides has been repudiated by every responsible clinician of note, and he has been disciplined by the American Psychoanalytic Association for presenting - under sworn statement and in court - statements of that Association dating from the 1950's as statements of its current views on homosexuality. In the face of threatened prosecution, he appears to have ceased doing so, at least for the present. Ironically enough, Dr. Socarides' son, Richard, is openly gay and was a senior member of President Clinton's White House staff with the position of presidential liaison to the Department of Labor. Of all of Socarides' offspring, Richard and his male partner are the only ones to have presented Socarides the elder with (adopted) grandchildren. One can only hope that these children's visits with their grandfather are supervised.
Rating: 
Summary: Important content--could be arranged better
Review: Charles Socarides is obviously an expert at what he does, but this book's question and answer format gets tiresome after a while. That really is a shame because he makes very valid points. His controversial and all-too-necessary work has brought joy to the lifes of thousands of lost souls. He is definitely not politically correct but medically sound. It's a very enlightening work; I just wish he had arranged it in a more straight forward manner.
Rating:
Summary: Excellant Book!
Review: Charles Socarides provides an extremely strong arguement against the homosexual lifestyle, which in turn highlights why we have to understand homosexual behaviour, in order to tackle it as an inherrent problem facing society today. Socarides provides valid arguements both from a historical as well as a contemporary point of view. Overall the question and answer format was a good way to project this information.
Rating:
Summary: The dinosaurs are still leaving footprints.
Review: Charles Socarides' antihomosexual diatribe demonstrates the ways in which bigotry can hide behind pseudo-scientific jargon. This book could best be understood as the dying gasp of a discredited theorist who refuses to recognize that the world has changed and that his theory has been disproved. Even the organizations that once provided a home for these theories, like the American Psychoanalytic Association, have renounced the pathological model of homosexuality espoused by the author. The author, whose life work is no longer taken seriously by the scientific community, finely grinds his ax against organized mental health professionals, lesbian and gay professionals, the gay rights movements. In fact, everyone is to blame but the author for what he believes is a decline in moral values. The book, written in a question and answer style, can be read as a modern tragedy whose major, unsympathetic protagonist (Charles Socarides) is out of touch with the contemporary research on homosexuality. The fact, that Dr. Socarides' son recently came out as gay himself only compounds the tragedy further.
Rating:
Summary: Heterosexism to the Extreme
Review: Charles W. Socarides never tells us WHY homosexuality is a bad thing. Why is it bad? What's wrong with it? He just can't answer that question. His reasons for disliking gay people, or thinking gay people are "yucky" make about as much sense as my distaste for certain green vegitables. Who cares if someone is gay? I couldn't care less! Why does a "so-called" straight man spend his entire life studying and obsessing over issues having to do with male homosexuality? Gee, I wonder. Looks like Socarides has his own closet-cleaning to worry about. Straight guys, and I mean real straight guys, don't spend their lives thinking only about gay stuff. Think about it. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what's going on here. I'll give you one adjective, the best one adjective to sum up Socarides's whole career (and life): self-loathing.
|
