Aesthetic Realism
Bobster
Anyone know anything about Aesthetic Realism? Anyone had any experience
with this group? They haven't gotten much media attention and I haven't
found much on the web, either.
labor...@jon.cjfny.org
In article <34D9B0...@hotmail.com>,
I was involved for 41 years. What do you want to know? BTW, see New York
Post, Sunday, Feb. 1, 1998 for good reporting on this, the first in many
years.
Ann S.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
bobster
Forty one years? I didn't know they'd been around that long.
I first saw a bunch of Aesthetic Realists on the David Susskind Show
many years ago. It sounded very intriguing. Their main contention was
that they are able to change gays into non-gays, and on the David
Susskind Show they had three ex-gays, two of whom still looked and acted
very gay.
Doesn't this contention get them into a lot of trouble from gay
organizations? Also, psychotherapists claim that homosexuality cannot
be changed. Aesthetic Realists claim otherwise. Who is right? Don't
they come across a lot of the same criticism that the ex-gay Christian
ministries get? Their critics claim that they're homophobic and that
their adherants don't actually change, they're just in a state of
denial.
Wouldn't the Aesthetic Realists have more success trying to persuade the
mental health establishment that they can change gays to straights,
instead of wearing buttons claiming "Victim Of The Press"? I saw a
bunch of them demonstrating in front of the Metropolitan Museum of Art a
few years ago and they were wearing placards denouncing the New York
Times for not accepting their claims that they can change gays to
straights. I was wondering, wouldn't they have better luck persuading
the mental health profession about their claimed results, instead of
trashing the Times, which is, after all, only reporting the generally
accepted claims of the psychotherapy industry? In short, wouldn't they
be better off persuading their critics of their success, instead of
denouncing the press for simply doing its job?
Also, I was wondering what the appeal of Aesthetic Realism is for
non-gays? Doesn't their reputation for changing gays to straights turn
a lot of curious people off? If Aesthetic Realism is a sort of
self-help, self-actualization type program, then why do they concentrate
on this particular aspect? Are most of the people in Aesthetic Realism
gay or ex-gay? How do they counter the "gay is good" argument from gay
organizations?
And why do they seem so paranoid about the press? Why don't they try to
cultivate better relations with the press to gain more popular
acceptance? Their constant "Victim Of The Press" cliche makes them seem
paranoid.
If they can change gays to straights, then why have they had such a
difficult time persuading anyone outside their own ranks of their
success? Shouldn't it be easy to convince the powers that be (the
press, the mental health profession, etc.) of their claims if they
actually are as successful as they claim?
And what is your personal situation, Ann? Are you an ex-gay? If not,
then what first attracted you to Aesthetic Realism? If so, then how do
you counter the accusation that you're simply in denial?
Thanks for the tip about the Post. I'll see if I can find that issue on
the web.
Your comment that this is the first good reporting in the press in a
long time tends to reinforce my observations about the paranoia of
Aesthetic Realism. Why would the press treat this organization
unfairly?
Regards,
Bobster
Labor...@jon.cjfny.org
In article <34E35E...@hotmail.com>,
Last things first--I became involved in Aesthetic Realism because my parents
were involved before I was born. They are artists, and the founder of
Aesthetic Realism started by teaching poetry (that's the "aesthetic" part).
Aesthetic Realism's involvement with changing homosexuality was really a
tangent. The basic philosophy is about how the way people can answer their
life questions is by studying the structure of beauty, which it says is always
a making one of opposites. You can visit their website, which is very
informative.
I won't address that part of your question just now, because I only have a few
minutes, but you should know that I am no longer involved. I disengaged
myself about 12 years ago, because I felt my life was being controlled. I
(and others who experienced Aesthetic Realism, (although none for as long)
have since realized that a basically quite useful body of knowledge has been
almost smothered by its adherents in the name of protecting it.
There is much more that can easily be explained in a few paragraphs, but I do
agree that the movement would be better served by addressing itself to mental
health and other professionals, and by allowing a dialogue in which these
professionals could freely question and discuss, not by demanding a certain
attitude before the professionals even have a chance to inquire.
The Times has come in for a special dose of protest, because it was Times
critics and editors who early dared to criticize the claim by Aesthetic
Realism that it was the only and complete truth. You'll see that theme if you
visit their site.
Good luck.
Ann
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Labor...@jon.cjfny.org
In article <6cd0oe$4s0$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
Correction: In my reply of 2/17/98, I wrote "There is much more that can
easily be explained...." I meant to write "There is much more than can easily
be explained...."