XGW Clears Something Up
Ex-Gay Watch has done a real service by following up on a potentially important story.
Francis Collins is a geneticist who led the Human Genome Project -- one of the most spectacular scientific accomplishments of our lifetime. He is also an evangelical Christian with a book out called The Language of God, where he tries to reconcile his flavor of Christianity with science. Whether he's successful at that, I don't know.
He also lives in Montgomery County.
In case you don't follow this story, there is a small but noisy organization called NARTH -- the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality -- that works on the premise that psychotherapy can change a person's sexual orientation. At least, they assert you can make gay people straight, I don't think they've tried to go the other way with it. There is a lot of controversy surrounding the organization, which I won't go into, but let's say the word "nut" is useful in discussing them.
Dean Byrd is a leading NARTH shrink who has commented on the MoCo sex-ed curriculum, among other things. The CRC and PFOX love this guy, because it says "PhD" after his name and he will say things to support their bigotry. He writes a column at the NARTH web site, including a recent article with the headline: "'Homosexuality Is Not Hardwired,' Concludes Dr. Francis S. Collins, Head Of The Human Genome Project." The article has a couple of quotes from Collins mixed in with a bunch of anti-gay junk, to make it look like Collins believes that sexual orientation is not genetic -- in NARTH's view of the world, this would support their view that sexual orientation can be changed.
Well, David Roberts at Ex-Gay Watch got to wondering about this, and contacted Collins to ask him what he really thinks.
Here's what Collins told them:
It is false to dichotomize behavior as being either genetic or chosen. Genes work by interacting with the environment; it may be the influence of the mother's hormones and other factors in the womb, or any of a number of things after birth. Why can you have identical twins, where one is right-handed and the other is left-handed? It doesn't mean you choose which hand to use, it just means there's more to it than just genes, which are the same between identical twins.
On the other hand, as Collins notes, if one identical twin is gay then the chance that the other one is gay is about ten times what you'd expect by chance. So there is clearly a genetic component to it.
But you know what? It doesn't matter. We can respect people without having a full scientific explanation of why they feel the way they do.
Thanks to Ex-Gay Watch for clearing this up.
Francis Collins is a geneticist who led the Human Genome Project -- one of the most spectacular scientific accomplishments of our lifetime. He is also an evangelical Christian with a book out called The Language of God, where he tries to reconcile his flavor of Christianity with science. Whether he's successful at that, I don't know.
He also lives in Montgomery County.
In case you don't follow this story, there is a small but noisy organization called NARTH -- the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality -- that works on the premise that psychotherapy can change a person's sexual orientation. At least, they assert you can make gay people straight, I don't think they've tried to go the other way with it. There is a lot of controversy surrounding the organization, which I won't go into, but let's say the word "nut" is useful in discussing them.
Dean Byrd is a leading NARTH shrink who has commented on the MoCo sex-ed curriculum, among other things. The CRC and PFOX love this guy, because it says "PhD" after his name and he will say things to support their bigotry. He writes a column at the NARTH web site, including a recent article with the headline: "'Homosexuality Is Not Hardwired,' Concludes Dr. Francis S. Collins, Head Of The Human Genome Project." The article has a couple of quotes from Collins mixed in with a bunch of anti-gay junk, to make it look like Collins believes that sexual orientation is not genetic -- in NARTH's view of the world, this would support their view that sexual orientation can be changed.
Well, David Roberts at Ex-Gay Watch got to wondering about this, and contacted Collins to ask him what he really thinks.
Here's what Collins told them:
It troubles me greatly to learn that anything I have written would cause anguish for you or others who are seeking answers to the basis of homosexuality. The words quoted by NARTH all come from the Appendix to my book “The Language of God” (pp. 260-263), but have been juxtaposed in a way that suggests a somewhat different conclusion that I intended. I would urge anyone who is concerned about the meaning to refer back to the original text.
The evidence we have at present strongly supports the proposition that there are hereditary factors in male homosexuality — the observation that an identical twin of a male homosexual has approximately a 20% likelihood of also being gay points to this conclusion, since that is 10 times the population incidence. But the fact that the answer is not 100% also suggests that other factors besides DNA must be involved. That certainly doesn’t imply, however, that those other undefined factors are inherently alterable.
Your note indicated that your real interest is in the truth. And this is about all that we really know. No one has yet identified an actual gene that contributes to the hereditary component (the reports about a gene on the X chromosome from the 1990s have not held up), but it is likely that such genes will be found in the next few years.
It is false to dichotomize behavior as being either genetic or chosen. Genes work by interacting with the environment; it may be the influence of the mother's hormones and other factors in the womb, or any of a number of things after birth. Why can you have identical twins, where one is right-handed and the other is left-handed? It doesn't mean you choose which hand to use, it just means there's more to it than just genes, which are the same between identical twins.
On the other hand, as Collins notes, if one identical twin is gay then the chance that the other one is gay is about ten times what you'd expect by chance. So there is clearly a genetic component to it.
But you know what? It doesn't matter. We can respect people without having a full scientific explanation of why they feel the way they do.
Thanks to Ex-Gay Watch for clearing this up.
posted by JimK at 10:51 AM
34 Comments:
"It is false to dichotomize behavior as being either genetic or chosen."
Yes, it is. But it is also false to assert that because there are genetic, or other biological, factors that the condition is beyond choice and that feelings can't be resisted and overcome.
Anon, what do you know about that? Are you resisting your feelings? Why do you think someone should deprive themselves of love? And anyway, there was nothing in this post about resisting feelings. I wonder why you would bring up that unrelated subject.
JimK
Anonymous, gays don't owe it to you or anyone else to resist their attractions.
And the studies by Spitzer and Shidloe and Schroeder and the testamony of "exgays" like the head of Exodus Alan Chambers show that such feelings cannot be overcome, but merely repressed - the feelings always exist.
"Courting the anti-war constituency, Democratic presidential rivals Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama both voted against legislation that pays for the Iraq war but lacks a timeline for troop withdrawal."
Did you guys know that in every wartime general election in U.S. history, the most hawkish candidate has won?
Every time.
"And the studies by Spitzer and Shidloe and Schroeder and the testamony of "exgays" like the head of Exodus Alan Chambers show that such feelings cannot be overcome, but merely repressed - the feelings always exist."
How about a quote from one of those studies saying that?
"How about a quote from one of those studies saying that?"
Why do we need quotes from these "scientists" when we have God's unrefutable word? Anonymous, you should seek after what is real and true,not what will mislead you.
Here's what Spitzer says on the YouTube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwE6_dLweYo):
"It's understandable that Focus on the Family would be delighted with the results of my study because the study did indicate that there was evidence that some gays can change not only their Sexual Identity but their Sexual Orientation, fantasy and arousal, so of course they are,were delighted with that study. What they failed to mention, and it's not I guess a big surprise, is that in the Discussion I noted that it was so hard for me to find 200 subjects to participate in the study, that I have to conclude that although change is possible and does occur, it's probably quite rare. And of course, they don't want to mention that."
"As far as the gay person who is thinking about change, the gay person wants to know not only can some people change but how likely is it if I go into some kind of therapy or program. So my study I think does indicate that some gays can change but it also suggests that it's probably pretty rare so the gay who is thinking about entering some kind of a program to change should know that the likelihood of success is quite small. And of course, Focus on the Family doesn't want to say that."
In interviews, Dr. Spitzer said:
"Our sample was self-selected from people who already claimed they had made some change. We don't know how common that kind of change is. . . . I'm not saying that this can be easily done, or that most homosexuals who want to change can make this kind of change. I suspect it's quite unusual."
"I suspect the vast majority of gay people would be unable to alter by much a firmly established homosexual orientation."
"...the kinds of changes my subjects reported are highly unlikely to be available to the vast majority [of gays and lesbians]... "[only] a small minority -- perhaps 3% -- might have a "malleable" sexual orientation." He expressed a concern that his study results were being "twisted by the Christian right."
He told the Washington Post in 2005 that supporters of reparative therapy have misrepresented the results of his study. He said:
"It bothers me to be their knight in shining armor because on every social issue I totally disagree with the Christian right...What they don't mention is that change is pretty rare."
He noting that the subjects of his study were not representative of the general population because they were considerably more religious. He calls as "totally absurd" the beliefs that everyone is born straight and that homosexuality is a choice.
Wayne Besen, gay activist and author of Anything But Straight: Unmasking the Scandals and Lies Behind the Ex-Gay Myth, wrote in his book:
“Despite our insistence, Spitzer elected not to use physical evidence to corroborate the ex-gay testimonies. I asked him why he had refused to use either the polygraph or the penile plethysmograph on his subjects. According to Spitzer, “there was no way he could get his subjects to submit to such tests.” It never seemed to dawn on Spitzer that these individuals were doggedly avoiding these truth-detecting instruments because they were not telling the truth.” (Besen, Wayne. Anything But Straight: Unmasking the Scandals and Lies Behind the Ex-Gay Myth.)
Assuming that the more than 1,000 therapists in NARTH each have had 50 clients per year over the previous five years, then they have treated over 250,000 homosexuals and bisexuals with reparative therapy. Various transformational ministries have treated other gays, bisexuals and lesbians who were seeking change. Yet, Dr. Spitzer was only able to find 274 potential subjects for his study in all of America. This data alone indicates that reparative therapy is almost always a failure.
Schroeder & Shidlo:
Two psychiatrists conducted a study to determine the experiences of people who have been treated by either ex-gay ministries or individual therapists with reparative therapy.
In 1997-SEP-26, the Detroit News published an article about their tentative results up to that date. The researchers were then halfway towards their goal of 200 subjects. Shidlo reported that:
After reparative therapy, clients: "Frequently... become very, very depressed." This commonly triggers self-destructive behaviors (e.g. unsafe sex, drug abuse, attempted suicide, self-hatred).
The stability of the client's family of origin can be harmed by teaching the concept that homosexuality is caused by poor parenting.
Some religious gays and lesbians felt a profound sense of failure when they cannot attain what they felt God expected of them.
One common result of the failure of reparative therapy is that it finally convinces some clients that their sexual orientation is truly unchangeable. The client may consider this to be a positive result as it this can lead to their final acceptance of homosexuality as an integral part of what they are.
The researchers had not yet found any "cures" as a result of reparative therapy. Two male subjects initially reported that they had been cured, but later admitted that they had simply chosen to be celibate; their sexual orientation was unchanged.
Shidlo said: "If it were changeable, I think we would have seen it by now. There's been so much effort expended on it -- so many tears, so many dollars, so much energy, so many promises -- that it would have happened to someone. And if there is such a person out there, I'd love to talk to them...They tell me in retrospect, it was a sham. They were fooling themselves, or they were fooling others or both.
They presented their paper at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association on 2001-MAY-9. They found that eight of the 202 subjects studied reported that they were able to change their sexual orientation. However, seven of the eight were involved in the ex-gay movement as counselors or group leaders. Some have suggested that their stories may not be accurate. There is a good chance that one of the 202 was telling the truth, making the reported failure rate for reparative therapy equal to 99.5%.
So, when you said this:
"And the studies by Spitzer and Shidloe and Schroeder and the testamony of "exgays" like the head of Exodus Alan Chambers show that such feelings cannot be overcome, but merely repressed - the feelings always exist"
you were wrong.
Yes, I should have said "virtually never can be overcome".
Or let me rephrase that - I should have said "in all likelihood can never be overcome". Its not clear that any of the people who claimed to have changed actually did. Shidlo and Schroeder said they felt there was probably one out of 202 who had changed, but that wasn't a certainty either, and like Spitzer they never tested the claims with lie detectors or plethysmograph testing,
You might want to also rephrase "show that" to something else too.
I'm sure you'd like me to, but that is accurate so you'll just have to accept it.
Andrea said:
Jim, I think we know why anon would take about resisting feelings. that is what the only "ex-gay" movement is about- not real change which is virtually impossible(maybe 1 out of 202 people and that is in doubt) but denial and pretense. Many could resist and deny and deprive themselves- celibacy is a religious practice(not just among catholics) as well as a decision for non-religious people straight and gay. Not having sex or not allowing yourself to love someone does not change your orientation nor does it make you a non-sexual being.
Once again, anything that disagrees with the gay party line should be subject to polygraph tests and penile plethysmographs
...but gays can choose whatever science indicates support their position and call all the rest flawed.
Funny that while gays only represent 2% of the population and demand rewriting all the laws to their favor they propose that the rights of (perhaps) a minority in their own populaton should be dismissed as irrelevant.
Actually, according to kinsey's studies, the vast majority of people who experience same-sex attraction before the age of 18 do not ultimately maintain homosexual identity.
Randi's right...except that ex-gays also don't owe gays or anyone else acceptance of their same-sex attractions.
unTWIsTedtruth said Once again, anything that disagrees with the gay party line should be subject to polygraph tests and penile plethysmographs...but gays can choose whatever science indicates support their position and call all the rest flawed.
The fact is any treatment that claims to cure is not allowed on the market in America until it passes scientific analysis of both its efficacy and risk. Every treatment must meet the same scientific standards -- that it does what it claims to do and that it causes no harm while doing so. Recent peer reviewed studies have found that ex-gay treatments have a poor record of success and a high record of harm. Claiming that "gays can choose whatever science indicates support their position and call all the rest flawed" is a flat out lie.
Ex-gay practitioners are keenly aware of the many requirements to market cures. To get around federal requirements, most ex-gay treatments are done under the guise of religion, which requires no such testing and analysis for efficacy and risk.
Treatments for ex-gays fails to meet scientific standards from the start because sexual orientation is not an illness. Scientific findings long ago and continuing through today indicate that sexual orientation is not an illness. Expressing contempt for and prejudice against those with minority sexual orientations is bigotry.
Twisted Truth said "Once again, anything that disagrees with the gay party line should be subject to polygraph tests and penile plethysmographs
...but gays can choose whatever science indicates support their position and call all the rest flawed."
Anonymous, the "exgay" claims deserve to be put to the test because such claims are used primarily to deny gays equal rights and the "exgay" "therapy" itself has been shown to be harmful. Society has no business looking the other way when ineffective and harmful procuedures are used to bilk unsuspecting individuals of thousands of dollars. There isn't any science that supports the claim that people can change same sex attractions into opposite sex attractions. The purveyor's of the "exgay" lie have studiously avoided tracking the results of "reparitive therapy" because they know it doesn't work and the few studies on it have verified that it doesn't.
The "exgay" sham is perpetrated solely for political reasons, to justify denying gays equal rights by creating the false impression that all gays can and should change to please bigots like you - all the time while reaping monetary gain from selling this snake oil. That's why the "exgay" industry doesn't try to verify efficacy because changing gays isn't the goal, profiting while maintaining unjust societal rejection of gays is.
Twisted truth said "Funny that while gays only represent 2% of the population and demand rewriting all the laws to their favor they propose that the rights of (perhaps) a minority in their own populaton should be dismissed as irrelevant."
Gays do no such thing. Gays seek equal treatment under the law like equal access to marriage - no gay is trying to deny so called "exgays" access to marriage or trying to exclude them from anti-discrimination laws or school anti-bullying programs. Its the "exgay" political pawns that try to deny gays those rights.
Twisted truth said "Actually, according to kinsey's studies, the vast majority of people who experience same-sex attraction before the age of 18 do not ultimately maintain homosexual identity."
See, now you're resorting to misleading weasel words like "identity". Lots of people claim to have rejected a gay "identity" but virtually all admit when pressed that they still experience same sex attractions. Saying someone doesn't "maintain a homosexual identity" merely refers to the label they do or do not apply to themselves. Studies show that up to 10% of men who don't consider themselves gay have sex with men. And its pretty ironic that you want to refer to Kinsey when it suits your anti-gay agenda while ignoring that his studies suggested 10%, not 2%, of the population is gay. Many, perhaps most gays live in secret and won't admit their orientation so when you quote figures like 2% those figures simply can't be relied on as its common for gays to deny being gay - so much for your bigoted attempts to make it look like gays are too few for society to worry about.
IS HOMOPHOBIA ASSOCIATED WITH HOMOSEXUAL AROUSAL?
by Henry E. Adams, Ph.D., Lester W. Wright, Jr., Ph.D. and Bethany A. Lohr
New Study Links Homophobia with Homosexual Arousal
Questions Whether It Is Latent Homosexuality Or A Response to Anxiety
Psychoanalytic theory holds that homophobia --the fear, anxiety, anger, discomfort and aversion that some ostensibly heterosexual people hold for gay individuals -- is the result of repressed homosexual urges that the person is either unaware of or denies. A study appearing in the August issue of the Journal of Abnormal Psychology, published by the American Psychological Association (APA), provides new empirical evidence that is consistent with that theory.
Researchers at the University of Georgia conducted an experiment involving 35 homophobic men and 29 non-homophobic men as measured by the Index of Homophobia scale. All the participants selected for the study described themselves as exclusively heterosexual both in terms of sexual arousal and experience.
Each participant was exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual and lesbian videotapes (but not necessarily in that order). Their degree of sexual arousal was measured by penile plethysmography, which precisely measures and records male tumescence.
Men in both groups were aroused by about the same degree by the video depicting heterosexual sexual behavior and by the video showing two women engaged in sexual behavior. The only significant difference in degree of arousal between the two groups occurred when they viewed the video depicting male homosexual sex: "The homophobic men showed a significant increase in penile circumference to the male homosexual video, but the control [non-homophobic] men did not."
Broken down further, the measurements showed that while 66% of the non-homophobic group showed no significant tumescence while watching the male homosexual video, only 20% of the homophobic men showed little or no evidence of arousal. Similarly, while 24% of the non-homophobic men showed definite tumescence while watching the homosexual video, 54% of the homophobic men did.
When asked to give their own subjective assessment of the degree to which they were aroused by watching each of the three videos, men in both groups gave answers that tracked fairly closely with the results of the objective physiological measurement, with one exception: the homophobic men significantly underestimated their degree of arousal by the male homosexual video.
Do these findings mean, then, that homophobia in men is a reaction to repressed homosexual urges, as psychoanalysis theorizes? While their findings are consistent with that theory, the authors note that there is another, competing theoretical explanation: anxiety. According to this theory, viewing the male homosexual videotape may have caused negative emotions (such as anxiety) in the homophobic men, but not in the non-homophobic men. As the authors note, "anxiety has been shown to enhance arousal and erection," and so it is also possible that "a response to homosexual stimuli [in these men] is a function of the threat condition rather than sexual arousal per se. These competing notions can and should be evaluated by future research."
Reference:
Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal? by Henry E. Adams, Ph.D., Lester W. Wright, Jr., Ph.D. and Bethany A. Lohr, in Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 105, No. 3, pp 440-445.
3/18/99
http://www.selfhelpmagazine.com/articles/glb/glbtphobia.html
RANDI: See, now you're resorting to misleading weasel words like "identity". Once again, you purposely ignor the potential of "change." Kinsey's stats say that about 50 times more people who have same-sex attraction or interaction end up heterosexual. The rest of your argument is strictly your opinion to which you are entitled.
Even so, it's obvious you have never actually read Kinsey. I didn't ignore Kinsey saying 10% because he never said it. He actually said 90%. A preposterous number. 10%-gay was "derived" from the Kinsey scale by gay activists: "We used that figure when most gay people were entirely hidden to try to create an impression of our numerousness," Tom Stoddard, of the Lambda Legal Defense Fund.
And it was Human Rights Campaign that submitted the 2% number in their amicus brief in Lawrence v. Texas. (2.8% male, 1.4% female. Do the math and complain to them.) Almost every peer reviewed major study across the globe is in this same range of 1-4%.
But again, the real point is not the percentage of gays or ex-gays or ex-ex-gays. Individuals have the right to self-determination of how they wish to resolve their future without being riduculed. That person get's to decide for themselves. Not you. Not some movement on the left or right. Not me.
no gay is trying to deny so called "exgays" access to marriage or trying to exclude them from anti-discrimination laws or school anti-bullying programs.
You deny them every right because you deny ex-gays even exist. You call them a sham. You call them all liars or self-deluded.
Every single statement you make ridicules, demeans and dismisses others rights. You make it all about what you believe. That's about as narcissistic and discriminatory as it gets.
And you call me a bigot?
AUNT BEA "Recent peer reviewed studies have found that ex-gay treatments have a poor record of success and a high record of harm. Although there is no such thing as an ex-gay treatment, your implication is at best inaccurate.
In fact, critiques of studies of sexual reorientation by far are most critical on two grounds: 1. anecdotal/self reporting methodolgy and 2: that any therapy is unnecessary. Nevertheless, reorientation success rates of change for individuals with initial Kinsey ratings of 4 and 5 range from neglible up to to 78%. The "harm" you speak of is almost entirely in the form of increased depression which is endemic to most therapy efforts where the client feels s/he has 'failed' to reach an important goal.
The APA specifically supports the right of patients to seek change. As Patricia Nell Warren writes: "gay people have a RIGHT to make choices about their sexual orientation....Their lives are not the property of the gay community or leaders who create our activist rhetoric."
"Treatments for ex-gays fails to meet scientific standards from the start because sexual orientation is not an illness." Apples and oranges. First, the professions of psychotherapy or counseling are not pharmaceuticals and they offer no guarantees as they are highly dependent upon the patient. They seek to help the individual reach their personal goals...not yours.
It is quite illuminating that you imagine "ex-gay treatments are done under the guise of religion" to circumvent some imaginary 'federal requirements.' Neither mental health nor medical health care professinals are regulated at the federal level.
Second, noone ever made the illness claim. That response is specious and tries to change the subject away from every individual's right to self determination. Simply put, big noses, small breasts, or bald heads are also not illnesses but people still have every right to pursue what make them happy regardless if others think it is unnecessary.
Expressing contempt for and prejudice against those with minority sexual orientations is bigotry.
Exactly what you display for ex-gays ands those who have unwanted same-sex attractions. Thanks for labeling youself so others don't have to.
"We used that figure when most gay people were entirely hidden to try to create an impression of our numerousness," Tom Stoddard, of the Lambda Legal Defense Fund.
I notice you left out the word "said" in this sentence. Can you provide a news source for the quote you attribute to Tom Stoddard or is this just anti-gay propaganda you made up? When I searched the internet for that supposed quote, anti-gay groups like God Hates Fags, Family Research Institute, Jesus-is-Savior, Catholic International, and Tradition in Action come up, but no news sources.
Individuals have the right to self-determination of how they wish to resolve their future without being riduculed.
So if a person chooses to NOT partake in risky conversion therapy treatment that has little chance of changing their sexual orientation and great chance to lead to depression, self-loathing, and a host of other ills, that's OK too. People who decide NOT to submit to ex-gay treatment have the same right to self-determination as those who decide to submit of their own free will. Glad you agree it's none of anybody else's business to ridicule people for who they are and/or want to be.
Parents who force their LGBT kids into this harmful therapy are another subject. Do they have the right to risk their childrens' lives and well-being like Christian Scientist who refuse all medical interventions and allow God to take their children who happen to come down with medically controllable or curable diseases like juvenile onset diabetes and bacterial meningitis that have not been shown to respond to prayer alone? http://www.masskids.org/dbre/dbre_2.html
You deny them every right because you deny ex-gays even exist. You call them a sham. You call them all liars or self-deluded.
I have never called ex-gay people "a sham" or "all liars or self-deluded." I will omit the list of negative terms used to describe LGBT people because we all know them all. None of these terms is helpful to our understanding of what's going on here.
The few people who have publicly said they successfully became ex-gay now claim to be straight. Straights are allowed to marry the person they love without riducule while gays are not. This is America -- we all are supposed to share the SAME EQUAL RIGHTS. No one should be ridiculed or denied equal rights because of who s/he loves.
there is no such thing as an ex-gay treatment
Preposterous! Have you ever heard of Richard Cohen's man hugging, pillow whacking therapy that's supposed to turn gays to ex-gay? How about Love in Action where Zach Stark was forced by his parents to attend? Go Google "ex-gay treatment." I just got 94,500 hits.
reorientation success rates of change for individuals with initial Kinsey ratings of 4 and 5 range from neglible up to to 78%
Can you provide any peer reviewed studies that support these claims or is this more anti-gay propaganda? Note: Four is smack dab in the middle of Kinsey's seven point scale. Four = bisexual. Therapists can get some bisexuals to behave heterosexually, for a while.
The APA specifically supports the right of patients to seek change
And it also warns against treatments that risk harm. Ex-gay conversion therapy has a poor record of success and a high record of harm. Because of this lousy track record, both APAs as well as other mainstream professional medical and mental health organizations warn against ex-gay treatments.
The APA specifically supports the right of patients to seek change. As Patricia Nell Warren writes: "gay people have a RIGHT to make choices about their sexual orientation"
Talk about mixing apples and oranges. Patricia Nell Warren is not a psychologist or psychiatrist at either APA. She's a bisexual athlete whose full quote was, "Having unsafe sex with many partners is a dangerous choice. So is the choice to avoid drugs and alcohol as an occasion of unsafe sex. Likewise, a gay or lesbian or bisexual couple who decide to have a loving, monogamous relationship are not operating blindly off natural dynamics. They CHOOSE to live together that way.
Straight and gay people have a RIGHT to make choices about their sexual orientation."
According to your source, Ms. Warren, both gays and straights can have loving, monagomous relationships. Such relationships should grant both partners the same rights to adopt children, make medical decisions for each other, etc. regardless of the sexual orientation and gender of the couple.
Ms. Warren ends her paper with this statement:
Come to think of it, choice is a sword that cuts both ways. If gay people have the right to choose being straight, then straight people have the right to choose being gay. And maybe some straight people will do just that.
She's entitled to her personal opinion, which is what she wrote. For those who care to read all of her paper, you will find it here: http://www.whosoever.org/v2Issue2/warren.html
"psychotherapy or counseling...seek to help the individual reach their personal goals...not yours."
Agreed. Psychotherapists or counselors should not seek to help teens attain their parents goal either, but rather the teen's own goal. No minor child should be forced by parents to be subjected to risky ex-gay treatments IMHO.
It is quite illuminating that you imagine "ex-gay treatments are done under the guise of religion" to circumvent some imaginary 'federal requirements.'
My bad. I should have said "state requirements." Exodus International’s flagship ‘ex-gay’ residential treatment facility, Love in Action, faced possible closure by the state of Tennessee for unlawfully treating mentally ill people. Many young gays from anti-gay families turn to drugs and alcohol to dull the pain of their family's rejection.
"If they are teaching only from faith-based materials and they send the participants offsite for drug and alcohol treatment, then they are not required to be licensed," Turner told the Gaylifeuk/PlanetOut Network. "But if they are counselling onsite then they are required to be licensed as a drug and alcohol treatment facility in Tennessee."
http://www.gaylifeuk.com/news/viewnews.php?newsid=1121720316,72685,
Because LIA's treatments were found to be "faith-based," they managed to elude state regulation. No matter if they were forced by parents, or persuaded by someone, or even if they chose by their own free, the risk of harm to teens who attend ex-gay treatments remains high. The harm suffered by gays who sought ex-gay treatments has been documented by Shidlo and Schroeder.
Even Warren Throckmorton admits, I noted in my article the study done by Ariel Shidlo and Michael Schroeder that documented harm experienced by some people who sought reorientation counseling. The truth is we do not know how often harm is experienced by people seeking sexual reorientation. I do agree however, that there are harmful things done in the name of reorientation counseling. Mr. Carlson seems to take my support for the availability of reorientation type interventions as a denial that harm occurs. I did not do that and have never denied that some people have bad experiences in counseling.
http://www.drthrockmorton.com/article.asp?id=154
Second, noone ever made the illness claim.
Are you saying no one ever called gays "sick?" Another example of your denial of reality.
"Expressing contempt for and prejudice against those with minority sexual orientations is bigotry."
Exactly what you display for ex-gays ands those who have unwanted same-sex attractions.
That's not true. I have never expressed contempt or prejudice against anyone with same-sex attractions, whether wanted or not. You should apologize for your lie.
My beef has always been with those who encourage and/or force teens to enter ex-gay treatment programs because attempts to alter sexual orientation been found to be far more harmful to the individual than successful.
Dear UT,
Some religions teach that people should forgoe medical treatment for prayer, and many people believe fervently that God has healed them where medicine ha failed. I think insisting to someone who felt that way that they were wrong would be rude, but publicly stating that modern medicine is effective where prayer is not is not bigotry.
Schools don't teach the efficacy of prayer over medicine for two reasons: 1)to teach the latter would be an endorsement of a religion; and 2)schools have decided that medicine is effective, so teaching children not to go to doctors would be irresponsible.
Similarly, reparative therapy and conversion ministries (as well as the "unwanted" in unwanted same-sex attractions) are rooted in religion, and government can't endorse them. In addition, a growing body of research as well as the testimony of our brothers and sisters who have engaged in it (and certainly my own experience) indicate that ex-gay therapies are both ineffective and harmful. Your excuses that many therapies are ineffective and that unsuccessful therapy is usually harmful are remarkably weak.
Now, does that mean that there are truly no people who have genuinely changed their sexual orientation or gender identity? We have to accept people the way they present themselves, if out of nothing other than simple politeness, but our experience (and the research of scholars such as Spitzer, Shidlo and Schroeder) indicate that they are at least very rare, and that efforts to join them are likely doomed to failure.
Btw, your handle seems to indicate that you think people who disagree with you twist the truth. I suggest you change it to a simple name, as most people on this blog have.
Twisted truth, I never said Kinsey said 10% of people were gay, I said that's the conclusion one could infer from his studies.
A 2003 telephone survey of more than 4,000 men conducted by the New York City public health department just published in the Annals of Internal Medicine found that 10% of men who consider themselves heterosexual had had sex with one or more men in the past year and no woman. And that figure is undoubted low since telephone surveys traditionally encounter the greatest degree of cover-up of homosexual activity. And that's in addition to the 9 percent of the men who acknowledged being gay or bisexual.
http://www.indegayforum.org/news/printer/31092.html
A 1996 Calgary study (The Journal of Homosexuality, Vol. 36, No. 2, 1998, p. 1-18.) on 750 men randomly sampled showed 15.3% of them were gay to some degree.
Michael, Gagnon, Laumann & Kolata (1994) reported that 10.1% of the men aged 18 to 59 studied in probability samples reported some degree of homosexuality (by self-identification, desire, and/or behavior).
Gonsiorek, Sell & Weinrich (1995) put forward an estimate of about 10 percent (based on a 4 percent to 17 percent range in the studies reviewed) for "the prevalence of predominant same sex orientation (i.e. regular behavior or substantial attraction or both) in the United States." Gonsiorek et al. (1995) also cite the cross-cultural study by one of the authors, based on random sampling of 10,500 men and women in America, England and France indicating that in America 6.2 percent of men are homosexually active, while 20.8 percent have at some time since the age of 15 experienced either same gender sexual contact, or homosexual desires.
http://www.youth-suicide.com/gay-bisexual/homodemo.htm
A 2002 CDC study by the National Centre for Health Statistics showed that 8% of of respondents thought of themselves as something other than heterosexual and 1.8% of respondents refused to answer the question (we can assume they are gay as well given that heterosexuals have no reason to refuse to answer while gays do).
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/pubs/pubd/ad/361-370/ad362.htm
Once again, given that we know many, if not most gays are in the closet we must assume these numbers are all on the low side. So much for your "Almost every peer reviewed major study across the globe is in this same range of 1-4%." claim.
Twisted Truth said ""no gay is trying to deny so called "exgays" access to marriage or trying to exclude them from anti-discrimination laws or school anti-bullying programs."
You deny them every right because you deny ex-gays even exist. You call them a sham. You call them all liars or self-deluded."
Don't be absurd, no gay is denying any "exgay" anything. No gay denies that there are people who refer to themselves as "exgay", we merely deny that they've changed same sex attractions into opposite sex attractions, something the vast majority of "exgays" admit when pressed and which the studies show. You can't come up with a single example of gays working to deny "exgays" any rights - its all "exgays" trying to deny gays equal rights. No one is trying to prevent "exgays" from marrying who they like, from being included in anti-discrimination and hate-crimes laws, from being included in school anti-bullying programs - you're just showing your lying nature.
Twisted Truth said "Nevertheless, reorientation success rates of change for individuals with initial Kinsey ratings of 4 and 5 range from neglible up to to 78%. The "harm" you speak of is almost entirely in the form of increased depression which is endemic to most therapy efforts where the client feels s/he has 'failed' to reach an important goal.".
Twisted Truth, some "exgay" organizations may make such conversion claims, but none of them have anything to back them up, no studies, no long-term follow up, and, as Aunt Bea said bisexuals (the Kinsey 4s and 5s you mentioned) can choose to act only on heteroesexual desires without having changed in the slightest and this is almost certainly what has happened in these cases.
Twisted Truth said "Their lives are not the property of the gay community or leaders who create our activist rhetoric."
And once again, no gay has every tried to force an "exgay" to live other than they choose. It is bigots like you who use "exgays" as a justification for denying gays the right to marry or to be free from the threat of losing their job or home just because they are gay. It is anti-gay people like you who use "exgays" as a pathetic excuse to assert dominion over gay lives, its you who considers the lives of LGBTs like me your property.
Twisted Truth said ""Expressing contempt for and prejudice against those with minority sexual orientations is bigotry."
Exactly what you display for ex-gays ands those who have unwanted same-sex attractions.".
I support "exgays" right to live their lives however they choose. I have contempt for bigots like you who manipulate and use "exgays" as an excuse to try to deny LGBTs like the right to live our lives as we choose, to be free to marry the one we love most, to not be fired from our jobs or evicted from our homes merely because we are LGBT, to be free to adopt like any straight person or "exgay" might, to be protected in school from bullies, to be protected in hate-crimes legislation like religious people like you are.
"deny LGBTs like the right to live our lives as we choose,"
uh, this is kind of a vague statement; your right to do this depends on how your exercise of your choices affect others
"to be free to marry the one we love most,"
you're free to do whatever you want; marriage, however is not something you just do or just two people do, it's a collective act of an entire society: the society becomes obligated under this contract to extend certain privileges; you don't have a right to tell us we have to endorse your relationship; so sorry
"to not be fired from our jobs"
who has been firing you?
"or evicted from our homes merely because we are LGBT,"
landlords shouldn't have to support immoral behavior
"to be free to adopt like any straight person or "exgay" might,"
the welfare of the child is the most important factor
"to be protected in school from bullies,"
everyone should be; it's really no bigger problem for gays than anyone else
"to be protected in hate-crimes legislation like religious people like you are."
no need for this violation of freedom of thought
your right to do this [marry] depends on how your exercise of your choices affect others.. [marriage is] a collective act of an entire society
No sorry, society was not at my wedding it certainly does not reside inside my home. Who I marry effects no one but me and my spouse and is none of anyone else's business.
Those who seek to continue to deny equal civil rights to LGBT people because of their religious beliefs are immoral. Further it seems unconstutional to deny any group of Americans their unalienable right to the pursuit of happiness IMHO.
who has been firing you
The US Army, US Navy, US Air Force, US Marines Corps, and US Coast Guard have fired over 11,000 LGBT servicemen and women since 1994.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_ask,_don't_tell
Also:
The Bloomburg (Texas) Independent School District http://tinyurl.com/3azvw4
The Largo City (Florida) government http://www.sptimes.com/2007/02/28/Tampabay/Largo_officials_vote_.shtml
A television station in Maine http://www.waynebesen.com/columns/2005/10/fired-in-maine-for-being-gay.html
The state of Nebraska http://www.kolnkgin.com/home/headlines/7636291.html
There are many other cases of people being fired due to their minority sexual orientation.
landlords shouldn't have to support immoral behavior
Denying shelter to a couple in need is immoral. Ask Mary and Joseph.
the welfare of the child is the most important factor
Countless studies have shown that children raised by same sex couples do at least as well on all measures of child development (social, academic, emotional, etc.) as children raised by heterosexuals. Children who are not adopted, but get passed around foster care or sent to orphanages instead, do not.
"to be protected in school from bullies,"
everyone should be; it's really no bigger problem for gays than anyone else
Glad to know you think LGBT kids "should be" protected in school the same as "everyone." Now that MCPS is collecting data on bullying, we'll find out how much of a problem bullying is for all groups right here.
"to be protected in hate-crimes legislation like religious people like you are."
no need for this violation of freedom of thought
Hate crime legislation means it takes more than just "thought" to commit a crime no matter how many times your side spins it otherwise. You can have all the thoughts you want. It is only when hate-motivated actions cause harm to another person or property has a hate crime been committed.
Anonymous, in an effort to goad more serious bloggers, said, about bullying in school:
" it's really no bigger problem for gays than anyone else."
You have to be kidding! Didn't you go to school? Don't you remember school? Were you homeschooled on a different planet?
Aunt Bea and Randi: I thought to have an intelligent discussion but this is like a conversation with intellectually immature children.
You both vehemently claim that expressing contempt for and prejudice against those with minority sexual orientations is bigotry yet remain blind to the same connection with how gays (like you) routinely and rabidly trash ex-gays and anyone who accepts them.
You support exgays rights to live as they choose but deny they really exist...calling exgays a sham, an industry, liars and self-deluded. They are not scientifically proven. Anyone who acepts them are vitriolic bigots using them as pawns.
Your (feigned?) blindness to the obvious is a waste of my time. It is about as intellectually honest as the KKK claiming support for equal rights of all people while believing Blacks and Jews aren't people.
Go look up cults and narcissism. (You may also take a tip from Robert who was able to disagree with a cogent response.)
Anonymous said "landlords shouldn't have to support immoral behavior".
The only immoral behavior is that which hurts others. Gays in loving committed relationships hurt no one and are by definition moral. Any landlord that chooses to evict people merely for being gay is by definition immoral.
Anonymous said ""to be protected in school from bullies,"
everyone should be; it's really no bigger problem for gays than anyone else.".
That's incredibly ignorant:
Berlan and doctor of social work Bryn Austin, of Children's Hospital Boston Division of Adolescent Medicine analyzed data from more than 7,500 adolescents aged 14 to 22. Lesbian and gay adolescents were three to four times more likely to report having been bullied than heterosexual teens.
A British Columbia-wide study showed that gay and lesbian youth are much more likely to have experienced abuse than heterosexual youth. 61% have been physically abused and 40% have been sexually abused as opposed to 20% and 12% respectively (McCreary Centre Society. (1999). Being out: Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered youth in B.C.: An adolescent health survey. Burnaby: McCreary Centre Society. ).
NEW YORK, NEW YORK (October 10, 2001)--More than 8 out of 10 lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) students report verbal, sexual or physical harassment at school, according to a study conducted by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, or GLSEN, and released today in partnership with MTV.
Findings of the 2001 National School Climate Survey, which was comprised of 904 middle and high school students from across the country, include: 83% of LGBT students report being verbally harassed; 65% report being sexually harassed; 41% report physical harassment; and 21% report physical assault due to their sexual orientation. In addition, more than one out of five (23.6%) report hearing homophobic comments from faculty or school staff.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/teach/diversity/assault/
The FRONTLINE film "Assault on Gay America." The film, which first aired on February 15, 2000, on PBS, examines the brutal murder of Billy Jack Gaither, a thirty-nine-year-old gay man from Sylacauga, Alabama, and explores the roots of homophobia in America.
In the six-year period between 1990 and 1996, the FBI recorded more than 25,000 gay bashing incidents in the U.S., and this number is on the rise.
(National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs, 1996)
More than 2,550 incidences of anti-gay harassment and violence were reported in 16 U.S. cities in 1998. (National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs, 1999)
Nearly all (94%) of gay men, lesbians, and bisexuals report being victims of some kind of harassment. Forty-four percent report having been threatened with physical violence. Nearly one in five report having been punched, hit, kicked, or beaten at least once in their lives because of their sexual orientation.. (National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, 1998)
The most frequent sites of anti-gay incidents are schools and workplaces.
(Dr. Karen Franklin, 1998)
More than 22% of gay, lesbian, and bisexual youth skipped school because they felt unsafe, compared to 4.2% of their heterosexual peers. Forty-six percent of gay lesbian and bisexual youth attempted suicide compared with 8.8% of their heterosexual peers. (Massachusetts Department of Education, 1997)
Twenty-six percent of adolescent gay males report having to leave home as a result of conflicts with their family over their sexual orientation. Forty-two percent of homeless youth self-identify as gay or lesbian. (Pediatrics, 1987; Traveler's Aid, 1991 - GLSEN)
http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/youth/11826res20010405.html
A study of Massachusetts high school students published in the journal Pediatrics reports that nearly one-third of gay teens had been threatened in the past month with a weapon at school, compared to 7% of heterosexual students surveyed.
In a psychological study of 484 students at six community colleges conducted by Dr. Karen Franklin, 18% of the men interviewed admitted that they had committed physical violence or threats against men and/or women they perceived as gay or lesbian.
James Sears, professor of education at the University of South Carolina, created a ranking system to measure educators' attitudes toward gay and lesbian youth and teachers. He found:
Two-thirds of school counselors surveyed had "negative" attitudes about lesbian and gay youth.
1 out of 3 prospective teachers in the study could be classified as "high-grade homophobes."
In the "Making Schools Safe" study commissioned by the state of Massachusetts, 53% of gay and lesbian students reported hearing homophobic comments made by school staff.
Similarly, the GLSEN "National School Climate Survey," concluded that over 1 out of 3 lesbian and gay students reported hearing homophobic comments from school faculty or staff.
The study of Massachusetts youth published in Pediatrics found that more than 25% of self-identified gay teens said they had recently missed school out of fear for their safety, while only 5% of heterosexual teens had missed school out of fear.
Twisted Truth at May 29, 2007 2:07 PM
Twisted truth, the fact remains that no gays are trying to prevent "exgays" from living their lives as they choose. No gays are trying to prevent "exgays" from marrying whatever gender they desire, or from being included in anti-discrimination laws, or from being included in hate-crimes protections or school anti-bullying programs. Its anti-gay bigots like you who are using "exgays" as an excuse to oppose all of the above for gays - you're the one discriminating and oppressing people, not gays.
Andrea- not anon
If an ex-gay person exists- that person is straight. As a straight person, I have never been discriminated against for being straight. The whole equating ex-gays with gay people is BS. Play it somewhere else- we aren't buying.
Ah yes. When all else fails, Anon resorts to the personal attack:
"Aunt Bea and Randi: ...intellectually immature children....gays (like you)..."
What a great demonstration of how the "morally superior" operate.
UT says "sham, an industry, liars and self-deluded. They are not scientifically proven. Anyone who acepts them are vitriolic bigots using them as pawns."
You're creating straw men and debating them; to whom are you responding? Randi and Bea didn't actually say these things. What they did say is that reparative therapy and conversion ministries have a terrible track record of achieving their aims, and often cause harm. In addition, PFOX, Exodus, FoF, CRC, etc. use the supposed success (though they have no real data) of these methods to lobbying against lgbt rights (and, most alramingly to me, Gay-Straight Alliances). It would be more helpful to me if you quoted the sources to which you are responding, rather than putting words in people's mouths.
rrjr
As I said before, Untwisted Truth is a provocative handle. You might want to use a name instead.
Excuse me. I meant the unTWIsTedtruth resorts to the personal attack, not Anon.
Post a Comment
<< Home