The Aversion Project Case Study: How Human Dignity And Human Rights Were Denied Resulting In An Unethical Outcome
Introduction
Human rights of the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) community have been neglected for generations. This will be explored, particularly focusing on homosexuals, with the Aversion Project that happened in South Africa between the 1980s and 1970s. Breaking down the fundamental roots of how the project was made possible is fundamental in understanding how it led to human rights being violated of the personnel involved. It further exposes how ignoring rights can result in a lack of dignity showed, proving in themselves to be one of an unethical degree. Although this case study is a matter of the past, one can evaluate where South Africa stands today in terms of the rights of the LGBT community.
Case Study
The Aversion Project happened during the years of Apartheid in South Africa. The exact whereabouts of the project occurred at the Voortrekkerhoogte Military Hospital, ward 22, situated in Pretoria. It was understood that this ward was designed specifically for patients with mental and psychological disorders, hence the experiment began wherein homosexuality was seen as a “disease” and the aim of the experiment had was to find a cure. The experiment was carried out by psychiatrists of the South African Defence Force and ward 22 was under the command of Aubrey Levin. It was understood that the targets of this project were homosexual personnel from military troops, whereby some were asked to join and others were told to do so. The plan of action presented the proposed cure, which comprised of electric shocks that were strapped to the subjects’ body while the subject was exposed to images of naked bodies of the same sex. When sexual stimuli was observed, the voltage was increased. This type of therapy proved to be immensely brutal and harsh. It clearly constitutes as torture as well as physical and mental torment. The subjects were also given huge supplements of hormones which ultimately produced a hormonal imbalance and induced chemical castration. The last attempt at formulating ideas to cure homosexuality included sex changes. There were approximately 900 men and women who underwent the surgery enforced upon the candidates. The unfortunate ending to this project was the inhumane conditions that these homosexuals were left in due to the project being abandoned. These test subjects were left half man and others left half women, and this created severe mental torment with one suicide of Jean Erasmus recorded, which undoubtedly is one amongst many. Dr. Levin fled to Canada and denied everything, taking no responsibility whatsoever.
The Roots of the Aversion Project
Homosexuality is assuredly no advantage, but it is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation, it cannot be classified as an illness; we consider it to be a variation of the sexual function, produced by a certain arrest of the sexual development.
It is a great injustice to persecute homosexuality as a crime — and a cruelty too. -Sigmund Freud
From the above quote by Sigmund Freud it clearly outlines a major mistake that the psychiatrists made in the case study; which is looking at homosexuality as an illness or a disease that one can easily get rid of. In terms of an illness alluding to a mental illness, it cannot be classified in such a way either. One cannot be diagnosed with homosexuality because it is not a mental disorder but a sexual preference and something that pertains to the emotional character. The Oxford dictionary defines homosexuality as “a person who is sexually attracted to people of the same sex”. By failing to understand this, it degrades and lowers the standard by which they should be treated. Just because they displayed differences did not give reason to condemn them. It is clear that homosexuality is a difficult concept as it deviates from the norm and culture of what is seen as “right”. In South Africa, which is also inclusive of Africa, homosexuals are not easily accepted and it is often seen as morally incorrect.
Clearly to the psychiatrists their actions were perceived as ethical, because they were trying to cure an ‘illness’ and one can see where their view point arises from.
It is not right that a man should go with another man, or a woman with another woman. It is against African tradition and biblical teachings. - Daniel arap Moi, President of Kenya
The above quote expands more on the reason why homosexuality is frowned upon, particularly in African culture. It is believed to be against African culture and of a sinful and shameful nature. Looking at the unique state of South Africa even within Africa during the apartheid era, the experiment occurred during a period of traditional religion being valued as well as racial segregation amongst citizens.
This led on to the link between a homophobic nature and playing a part in rights violation. “Homosexuality is a deviation from “African Renaissance””. This is where one of the weaknesses of Ubuntu can be seen strongly because of the cultural sense of Ubuntu relating to African renaissance, it does not allow for variation and individual expression. It does not take unique personas into account when analysing cultural development of Africa. This is the same reason why military personnel that were asked to join accepted the offer, because of the fear of being different as well as the shame placed upon them from those surrounding them. The intentional purpose of making homosexuals feel ashamed based on individual external values and beliefs is atrocious. This is one of the profound points Sigmund Freud identifies, as individual homosexuals should not be ashamed and it should be nothing to be ashamed of.
Evaluating the rights violation
As Freud boldly points out; persecution of homosexuality is a crime and an injustice. This stems from the recognition that there is a sense of human dignity and respect associated with every human, but when there is a lack of this element it can be clearly outlined as a violation. It becomes an injustice from the perspective of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights that states that there is an inherent dignity which we as human beings acknowledge and we each have “equal and inalienable rights”. From the case study, the homosexuals were blatantly alienated to the extreme, whereby there was a separate ward in which they were kept, outlining physically that their rights have been removed and displaying a level of inequality to other personnel of the military. A homosexual is human before their sexual orientation is revealed. Therefore, first and foremost because they are human there is a sense of dignity and respect that is owed to them, and there was a huge lack of dignity and respect showed to the personnel from the beginning of The Aversion Project to the end of the degrading process of persecution undergone by the various victims. The therapy used treated the patients in an inhumane manner which further strays from the rights of individuals which originates from the right to life, liberty and security. This becomes equitable to be classified as unethical behaviour.
Where does South Africa stand today? And what of the present? Perhaps, in a nation attempting to portray itself as the direct opposite of the apartheid regime, as a liberalist and humanistic democracy that wants to right the wrongs of colonialism, racism, and sexism, there is a sense of new purpose, new directions. The stance South Africa takes today as a nation is to learn from the past to work together for a new purpose. In reference to the Case Study, rights of homosexuals are given more attention and more people are cultivating a mind-set of change, although there is a large majority opposing the notion of rights regarding the LGBT (Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender) community. However the rights remaining a huge debate, there are little but impactful changes being made as South Africa evolves and heads for new directions. These include gender neutral bathrooms, Gay parades and the stance many companies are making to employ members of the LGBT community.
Conclusion
The profound message carried through this case study points towards understanding the rights of every human being. There are differences displayed from one person to another and it is crucial to acknowledge the rights every human, African and South African possesses. In grasping this, unethical behaviour may be prevented in the way we treat others that may be governed by our beliefs.
