Do Not Confuse These Two Books
David Fishback forwarded this to me, we tip our hat to his son Dan for catching this one. Dan blogged about Rachel Maddow's fine demolition of Richard Cohen -- the counselor who claims to be able to make gay people straight -- on her show, and then said:
Man, this is bad. There is nothing on Cohen's Amazon page to indicate that his book is trying to tell parents that there's something wrong with their gay children, and that they can help their children quit being gay. Unless you know some of the codewords and recognize reviewers' names like Joseph Nicolosi, you'll never guess what this is about. You think your kid might be gay, you go to learn something about it, somebody recommended a book about gay children with straight parents, and you could very easily end up with Richard Cohen's malicious hypocrisy instead of real advice on how to relate to the child you love but don't understand.
Cohen's title is a rip-off, for one thing, just like PFOX's name is a rip-off of PFLAG, just like the whole "ex-gays are persecuted" thing is a rip-off of people who are really persecuted. The author of the real Straight Parents, Gay Children ought to take every penny Cohen has made off his book -- this is just a phishing scam done with books. Amazon should be careful about marketing these two juxtaposed -- there is almost zero probability that any one person will want to read both books, their audiences are entirely different. One book is written for people to learn to show love to their children and the other is written for parents who reject their children or want to change them into something they aren't.
Thanks to Dan -- you might remember I saw his band in London a couple of years ago -- for catching this. Richard Cohen has been thrown out of every professional organization he has ever belonged to, he does not conduct research, there is no scientific support for what he says. As Rachel Maddow pointed out, his work is being cited to promote the execution of gay people in Uganda, and his appearances on television are just embarrassing to watch. You really do wish there was a way to make sure that people who want to give love and support to their gay children get the right book.
After that interview aired, my mother noticed something totally weird - namely, that Cohen's book, "Gay Children, Straight Parents," bore a remarkable surface resemblance to a book she read when I first came out - "Straight Parents, Gay Children." While the latter helped my mom come to terms with my sexuality, and eventually to become an activist in her own right, the former is totally bogus "ex-gay" propaganda, denounced by every major medical and psychiatric institution in the country. Check out the covers:
Weird, right? When you google the good one, the bad one comes up second! I hope no one makes a terrible mistake and accidentally buys the bad one for their parents! Parents Children Children Parents
Man, this is bad. There is nothing on Cohen's Amazon page to indicate that his book is trying to tell parents that there's something wrong with their gay children, and that they can help their children quit being gay. Unless you know some of the codewords and recognize reviewers' names like Joseph Nicolosi, you'll never guess what this is about. You think your kid might be gay, you go to learn something about it, somebody recommended a book about gay children with straight parents, and you could very easily end up with Richard Cohen's malicious hypocrisy instead of real advice on how to relate to the child you love but don't understand.
Cohen's title is a rip-off, for one thing, just like PFOX's name is a rip-off of PFLAG, just like the whole "ex-gays are persecuted" thing is a rip-off of people who are really persecuted. The author of the real Straight Parents, Gay Children ought to take every penny Cohen has made off his book -- this is just a phishing scam done with books. Amazon should be careful about marketing these two juxtaposed -- there is almost zero probability that any one person will want to read both books, their audiences are entirely different. One book is written for people to learn to show love to their children and the other is written for parents who reject their children or want to change them into something they aren't.
Thanks to Dan -- you might remember I saw his band in London a couple of years ago -- for catching this. Richard Cohen has been thrown out of every professional organization he has ever belonged to, he does not conduct research, there is no scientific support for what he says. As Rachel Maddow pointed out, his work is being cited to promote the execution of gay people in Uganda, and his appearances on television are just embarrassing to watch. You really do wish there was a way to make sure that people who want to give love and support to their gay children get the right book.
posted by JimK at 8:31 AM
15 Comments:
Have you seen the videos of Richard Cohen? Too funny.
When he went on TV, Exodus and PFOX severed their ties with him, he was so absurd.
If the audiences who will read these books couldn't be more different, than what's the problem? Someone picks up the wrong book and says: "oops! wrong book! I better return it!"
Not seeing the problem here.
What an interesting comparison, Richard Cohen and Charles Manson. Manson brought girls into his sphere and encouraged them to hate their parents. Cohen brings gays into his "office," instructs them to lie across his lap on his couch and hug his "ex-gay self," and then encourages them to lash out at their parents. See Cohen's "bioenergetics video" where he whacks a pillow with a tennis racket, while screaming "'Mom! Mom! Mom! Mom! Why did you do that to me?'"
"oops! wrong book! I better return it!"
Not seeing the problem here.
Figures. Truth in advertising confuses you.
Hillary Clinton went to Copenhagen this with a surprise announcement that the U.S. taxpayer would happy to give 100 billion a year to developing countries
What a crock! Here's the relevant excerpt of Clinton's speech in Copenhagen:
And today I’d like to announce that, in the context of a strong accord in which all major economies stand behind meaningful mitigation actions and provide full transparency as to their implementation, the United States is prepared to work with other countries toward a goal of jointly mobilizing $100 billion a year by 2020 to address the climate change needs of developing countries. We expect this funding will come from a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources of finance. This will include a significant focus on forestry and adaptation, particularly, again I repeat, for the poorest and most vulnerable among us.
Far from "the U.S. taxpayer" footing the $100 billion a year by 2020, Secretary of State Clinton made it clear that the funding would come from a "wide variety of sources."
btw, still not winter and it's freezing
3 inches of snow tomorrow night here
If you've been watching your outdoor thermometer this week, you know that 3 days ago, on Dec. 15th, we hit 58 degrees for our high temperature but yesterday we only climbed to 38 degrees. That's a 20 degree high temperature drop in 2 days.
Enjoy the snow, until it melts and sends all that road salt into the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
Read again, idiot. I was comparing blaming Cohen for Uganda to blaming the Beatles for the Manson Family or blaming Jodie Foster for John Hinckley.
The Beatles never sent a representative or their record albums to Manson's house to coach him and his girls in the fine art of murder and blood graffiti, and Jody Foster never sent an assistant or Presidential assassination ideas to John Hinckley either. No one should blame the Beatles for Manson or Foster for Hinckley.
Conversely, Richard Cohen did send his representative, Caleb Brundidge, along with copies of his 2000 book, "Coming Out Straight" to work with the instigator of Uganda's kill gays bill.
After 10 years since publication of his book, during which time it has been repeatedly used to whip up false fear that sexual orientation has anything to do with sexual predators including in Uganda this year, Cohen claims he will remove "one particular quote" from future printings of it:
From Rachel Maddow's 12-8-09 show transcript:
MADDOW: ....your book portrays gay people as predators who must be stopped to protect the innocent.
COHEN: Oh, no, no, no.
MADDOW: It doesn‘t?
COHEN: No, no, no. Not at all. And in fact, Caleb told me he, with passion, shared to these people what he experienced as a homosexual man and as you heard Stephen Langa say, that people are searching for love. How could they punish?
It‘s just incomprehensible that they would - like, you know, as you have said over the last few days in this bill, that they would want to incarcerate or to criminally punish these men and women. We are totally against that. We are for your rights and anyone‘s rights to live a homosexual life. And we‘re for the rights for those who seek change and want to come out straight.
...MADDOW: Let me ask - I‘ll just read from your book, OK? Page 49, “Homosexuals are at least 12 times more likely to molest children than heterosexuals. Homosexual teachers are at least seven times more likely to molest a pupil. Homosexual teachers are estimated to have committed at least 25 percent of pupil molestation; 40 percent of molestation assaults were made by those who engage in homosexuality.”
This is the claim that you make in your book that exactly feeds these folks who want to execute people for being gay, what they need in order to justify that. Do you stand by what you said in your book?
COHEN: Actually, you know, that one particular quote, when I do republish it, reprint it, we will extract that from it, because we don‘t want such things to be used against homosexual persons.
He said "Oh no no no" and claimed his book does not say what it says until Rachel read to him on air. Then he said he'll remove that "one particular quote" from the next printing of his book.
Correcting such a vile lie ten years later after spreading it all over the globe is too little too late IMHO. Richard Cohen needs to go to Uganda and unequivocally spread the word that he and his IHF oppose this misguided law.
Even Warren Throckmorton seems to agree with me.
While he [Caleb Brundidge] says now that he advocated for compassion [in Uganda], I cannot find a clear statement that he opposed criminalization...On the contrary, the situation now is more dangerous and less conducive to hope than when Brundidge went to Uganda. Instead of appeals for money, I hope that IHF [Cohen's International Healing Foundation] will issue an appeal to their Ugandan hosts to defeat the proposed bill.
it's still not winter yet and we're having yet another snowstorm, this one massive
we had at least a foot of snow already and it's supposed to go on all day
looking at the forecast, there's no way this melts before Christmas
speaking of forecasts, two days ago the genius meteorologists were calling for two inches
btw, they're also telling us how hot it will be in 50 years
can anyone remember the last time Washington had a snowstorm this huge before winter started?
I remember one freak Veterans Day storm about 20 years ago but I don't think it was this big
glad to hear Obama could get out of town before the blizzard to go sign the global warming agreement
Barry Obama reportedly was reluctant to attend the final day of the UN's Copenhagen climate-change summit unless it was front-end wired to be a major political success.
But he went anyway, was twice humiliated in public by the Chinese premier and then finally settled for what the White House hailed as a "meaningful agreement."
Really? A top aide admitted that the deal was basically just "an important first step" that was "not sufficient to combat the threat of climate change."
Then Obama himself dropped the other shoe: The agreement contains no specific commitments on carbon emissions, only pledges that "will not be legally binding."
So what the hell was the point?
One would think that Obama had taken a lesson from his last trip to Copenhagen -- when he thought his presence alone would win the 2016 Olympic games for Chicago.
That is, that he would have learned that it is a mistake to publicly commit presidential prestige to an outcome that isn't locked up in advance.
Obviously, not.
So much for two years of work and a supposedly broad international consensus that was to make the Copenhagen conference little more than a formality.
Clearly, yesterday was about squabbling over how much money we'll borrow from the Chinese so that we can give it right back to Beijing and other Third World countries in exchange for their promise to . . . well, that was never clear.
And twice yesterday, Obama was kept waiting in public by China's premier.
This is scary stuff.
Obviously, the rest of the world has taken measure of Barack Obama -- and decided he's a pushover.
On the merits, not unfairly.
Now, we're not going to feign heartbreak over the outcome itself.
The conference was a UN-sponsored effort to pick the West's pockets on behalf of its own bureaucrats, plus assorted Third World kleptocrats, and it deserved to die ignominiously.
As for Obama, it was clear from Day One that he was on a very steep learning curve.
But who imagined it was this steep?
He's an embarassment to the country.
How far are Republicans willing to go to protect the insurance industry and block health reform for the millions of Americans who need it?
Far enough to deny funding and equipment for our troops in harms' way. Republicans are so desperate to block health reform and protect their special interest friends that they delayed funding for our men and women in uniform. Then they voted against it. GOP Hail Mary On Troop Funding Fails
"...This legislation:
1. Funds more than $100 billion for operations, maintenance and personnel for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and more than $23 billion for their equipment
2. Provides more than $150 billion to train our troops and prepare them for battle
3. Funds almost $30 billion for the health care of our service members and their families
4. Gives our troops a well-deserved pay raise
Sen. Russell Feingold (D-WI) broke with his standard practice of voting no on defense bills to vote with his party this time, in order to forestall GOP shenanigans. Moderate Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and Susan Collins (R-ME) also voted to end the filibuster, and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), who's running for Governor of Texas also defected from the GOP.
Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS) voted to continue the defense spending filibuster--an extremely rare practice for ranking members of the Appropriations Committee. Now, Democrats find themselves in the rare position of running against the GOP by accusing them of abandoning the troops. My how the tables have turned.
The GOP is also willing to waste Senate time before the holidays by demanding to have Sanders' public option amendment read aloud even though everyone knew they had no intention of voting for it.
Which bill or amendment will the Grand Obstructionist Party ask to have read to them next?
Republicans [led by McConnell and McCain] threatened to delay Senate business with a health care read-a-thon this weekend.
They'll only be delaying the inevitable. Senator Ben Nelson just announced he'll be the 60th Senator to "...vote for health care reform when it comes up for a cloture vote in the Senate early next week, now that the bill has been changed at his request. As the 60th and final Democrat to signal that he will support the bill, Nelson's decision virtually assures passage of the Democrats' sweeping health care reform.
"I believe this legislation will stand the test of time and will be noted as one of the major reforms of the 21s century," Nelson said in the Capitol Saturday. "Lives will be saved and our health care system will reflect the better nature of our country."..."
can anyone remember the last time Washington had a snowstorm this huge before winter started?
Yesterday's WaPo had an item about the history of DC's rare snowfalls:
Washington D.C.'s greatest December snowfall on record (since the late 1800s) occurred on December 17, 1932 when 12" fell. This storm has the potential to break that long-standing record. I'd place odds at 50/50.
Here are the record December snows for some other regional reporting stations:
Baltimore: 14.1", December 11-12, 1960
Richmond: 17.2", December 22-23, 1908
Baltimore's record is in play (50/50 chance), though it may be a little tougher for Richmond (20% chance) -- because they'll be flirting with the rain/snow line.
Could this storm make it into the top five on record of all time in D.C. (including all months of the year)? I'd give that a 30% chance.
Here are the top five storms:
January 27-28, 1922 ... 28 inches
February 11-13, 1899 ... 20.5 inches
February 18-19, 1979 ... 18.7 inches
January 6-8, 1996 ... 17.1 inches
February 15-18, 2003 ... 16.7 inches
There are more records of DC's weather here
From the CBO Director's Blog
"Manager’s Amendment to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act"
...CBO and JCT estimate that the direct spending and revenue effects of enacting the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act incorporating the manager’s amendment would yield a net reduction in federal deficits of $132 billion over the 2010-2019 period. Of that total amount of deficit reduction, the manager’s amendment accounts for about $2 billion, and the act as originally proposed accounts for the remaining $130 billion. (See our analysis released on November 18 of the act as originally proposed.)
The estimate includes a projected net cost of $614 billion over 10 years for the proposed expansions in insurance coverage. That net cost itself reflects a gross total of $871 billion in subsidies provided through the exchanges, increased net outlays for Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and tax credits for small employers; those costs are partly offset by $149 billion in revenues from the excise tax on high-premium insurance plans and $108 billion in net savings from other sources. Over the 2010–2019 period, the net cost of the coverage expansions would be more than offset by the combination of other spending changes that CBO estimates would save $483 billion and other provisions that JCT and CBO estimate would increase federal revenues by $264 billion. In total, the legislation would increase outlays by $366 billion and increase revenues by $498 billion between 2010 and 2019..."
That's right, the Senate Democrats' health care reform bill has managed to expand coverage and lower the federal deficit over ten years.
Yes we can!
it will only lower the deficit if they follow through on the cuts to Medicare
they've passed the same cuts repeatedly in the past and then reversed them at the last moment
premiums will also go up dramatically in the next couple of years
the reasons for cost acceleration has not been addressed
malpractice awards need to curbed, especially the legal fee portion
medical school capacity needs to expand vastly to meet demand
"(Dec. 16) -- The nation is short of thousands of primary-care doctors. Medical schools plan to add 3,000 first-year students by 2018, but that won't be enough to meet the need, according to a report from Bloomberg.com.
Though schools plan to educate more doctors, the demand for physicians is expected to soar if Congress passes a health care reform plan aimed at getting insurance to 31 million more Americans. The bill is being debated at a time when government-funded training for doctors has been frozen for 12 years.
A doctor, center, speaks during a cardiology class at the University of Miami. Medical colleges have added 1,500 seats since 2005 and plan to add 3,000 more by 2018.
"Do the math," said Steven Safyer, president and chief executive officer at New York's Montefiore Medical Center. "You give millions more people insurance, and it adds up to a much worse shortage."
Ed Salsberg, an official with the American Association of Medical Colleges, told the news service that the nation may be short of 159,300 doctors across all practice areas by 2025."
from Atlantic:
"So there's now about a 90% chance that the health care bill will pass.
At this point, the thing is more than a little inexplicable. Democrats are on a political suicide mission; I'm not a particularly accurate prognosticator, but I think this makes it very likely that in 2010 they will lost several seats in the Senate--enough to make it damn hard to pass any more of their signature legislation--and will lose the house outright. In the case of the House, you can attribute it to the fact that the leadership has safe seats. But three out of four of the Democrats on the podium today are in serious danger of losing their seats.
No bill this large has ever before passed on a straight party-line vote, or even anything close to a straight party-line vote. No bill this unpopular has ever before passed on a straight party-line vote. We're in a new political world. I'm not sure I understand it.
The irony of this is that this bill is great for me personally. I'm probably uninsurable, and I'm in a profession where most people now end up working for themselves at some point in their career. So mandatory community rating is great news for me and mine. But I think that it's going to be a fiscal disaster for my country, because the spending cuts won't be--can't be--done the way they're implemented in the bill. We've just increased substantially the supply of unrepealable, unsustainable entitlements. We've also, in my opinion, put ourselves on a road that leads eventually to less healthcare innovation, less healthcare improvement, and more dead people in the long run. Obviously, progressives feel differently, and it will never be possible to prove the counterfactual.
So there you are. Alea iacta est. I sure hope I'm wrong."
Aunt Bea: “Then he said he'll remove that "one particular quote" from the next printing of his book...
…Correcting such a vile lie ten years later after spreading it all over the globe is too little too late IMHO.”
And to further that sentiment…
Richard Cohen: “The Kinsey Institute published a [1978] study of homosexual males living in San Francisco which reports that 43 percent had sex with 500 or more partners, 28 percent had sex with 1,000 or more partners, and 79 percent said that over half of their sex partners were strangers.” [p48]
It’s almost New Year’s, is everyone up to quota?
---
“the problem is that the gay agenda keeps its cult intact by making sure no one in it hears that anyone has any other opinion”
(He’s right, you know. Without Gay-Google, I’d know all about those censored “opinions.”)
What do you suggest, anon, listen to the “opinion” of the Christian Bible:
Leviticus 20:13: If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
“Their blood will be on their own heads”
Defense: “He deserved it, God said so.”
---
Or perhaps we could listen to the “opinion” of the Ugandan Parliament, who’s been using Cohen’s book to craft this extermination bill.
In addition, we’ve clearly never heard your take on the matter, what say you?
--
“btw, I blame gays and lunatic fringe gay advocates for AIDS.”
Thank you for the admission.
was the quote from the 1978 Kinsey study wrong?
stream of consciousness from improv:
"What do you suggest, anon, listen to the “opinion” of the Christian Bible:
Leviticus 20:13: If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
“Their blood will be on their own heads”
Defense: “He deserved it, God said so.”"
as has been explained to you repeatedly, improv, this Bible verse needs to read in the context of the entire Bible
the truth is that the Bible says all sin deserves death and that homosexuality is but one of many sins
it also says all have sinned
no one could rightly say he was justified in killing someone because God said the killee deserved it because they'd logically have to kill themself first
"Or perhaps we could listen to the “opinion” of the Ugandan Parliament, who’s been using Cohen’s book to craft this extermination bill."
oh, I doubt that's the sole source of their thinking
to hear you guys talk, you'd think homosexuality would be a global state of mind were it not for the slander of these poor innocent souls by this Cohen fellow
if they think homosexuality can spread disease because its usually associated with promiscuity, they're probably right but its not the only undesirable social behavior associated with public health problems
I don't anyone would suggest executing alcoholics, for example
"In addition, we’ve clearly never heard your take on the matter, what say you?
--
“btw, I blame gays and lunatic fringe gay advocates for AIDS.”
Thank you for the admission."
never heard that?
I've stated this view on a regular basis on this blog for years
its never been successfully refuted
I blame gays and lunatic fringe gay advocates for AIDS.
And who do you blame for Syphilis, Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, Genital Herpes, Pelvic Inflammatory Disease, Human Papilloma Virus, and the rest of the STDs out there?
“as has been explained to you repeatedly, improv, this Bible verse needs to read in the context of the entire Bible”
Context within that context means that anyone can read anything into the Bible. And what is to be read into the myriad of errors in the Bible, and who is to do so?
“…homosexuality is but one of many sins …it [the Bible] also says all have sinned …no one could rightly say he was justified in killing someone because God said the killee deserved it because they'd logically have to kill themself first”
AKA “we’re all sinners.” A common---and dishonest---tactic among those who wish to hide their hatred behind the Bible. The second part of that sentence (thought) reads: “but some of us are more sinful than others.”
It’s an effort to portray one’s self as an equal with those whom you openly despise.
“oh, I doubt that's the sole source of their thinking”
So you admit that Cohen’s book was a part-of their thinking.
“I don't anyone would suggest executing alcoholics, for example”
Unless they’re GLBT alcoholics, of course. Further, alcoholism is not an intrinsic part of the human condition, human-sexuality is. But thanks for the non-thinking regurgitation of the religious right talking point.
--
Sociopathanon: “I blame gays and lunatic fringe gay advocates for AIDS. …I’ve stated this view on a regular basis on this blog for years … its never been successfully refuted”
Sure it has. As has been said “on this blog for years,” lesbians are the least likely demographic to contract and spread HIV.
Just as with the Bible, you forget whatever you want to.
--
Aunt Bea: “And who do you blame for Syphilis, Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, Genital Herpes, Pelvic Inflammatory Disease, Human Papilloma Virus, and the rest of the STDs out there?”
Sociopathanon: “you”
Good comeback, how long have you been holding that one in?
Post a Comment
<< Home