Woody said:
I know for a fact that the treatment works and you are WRONG, and I feel like I am doing your homework for you.
First, I never implied that you were a homosexual that reoriented. But if its true that's your business (you did say you "know for a fact" and this would seem the only way you could "know"). Second, if there's any "homework" to be done, it would be on the individual that makes the bold claims that you do. You are asserting that the so-called 'reorientation' of homosexuals is a fact. I'm simply asking for you to supply facts. Instead, you've gone to great lengths to provide us with anecdotes from UFO nutters and apologists of various religious delusions.
Woody said:
I have already provided you with some successes and you didn't choose any of the ones that can be verified. Why don't you contact the charter members of Exodus International? It's been in existence now for 30 years, and would not be around if it did not work -- just common sense.
Woody, are you truly this ignorant or are you so wrapped up in these copy/paste operations that you fail to even read your own words? The The Society for Psychical Research was founded in 1882 but they've yet to demonstrate any psychic abilities. Fallacious appeals to authority and anecdotes of believers are hardly evidence and only an utter fool would consider them so. Empirical evidence is what is needed in order to support your claims.
So let
me do
your homework for
you:
Emprical Evidence to Support the Claim of 'Reorientation' of Homosexuals
Only a few studies have been conducted that even
attempt to provide some empiricism with regard to the notion that gays can be 'reorientated' to heterosexual. Most notably was Spitzer (2003) who used self-reported informants to document at least some "minimal" change over 5 years. Pseudo-therapy groups like NARTH base much of their claims on the work of studies like Spitzer's -and Spitzer is probably the most recently notable effort, but the pseudoscience of reparative therapy probably began with Moberly (1983), who used no study subjects at all! She based her entire book on her own opinions based on the ancient works of luminaries like Freud.
But its the work of Spitzer and others that NARTH would like to cite (and you'd notice if you did
your homework instead of relying on me to do it for you) as valid. The primary outcome of Spitzer's study was that, in general, some gay men and women can change their core behaviors and appear content to be heterosexual. The problem is that the very thing that pseudoscience groups like NARTH accuse gays of (
pretending to be naturally orientated to a given gender) is what may be happening in their 'reorientations!'
Criticisms of 'Reorientation' and 'Reparative' Therapy of Homosexuals
The only thing that can really be said about NARTH and other nutter groups like them (assuming that even
some of their anecdotes are valid) is that they are successful in getting homosexuals (or bisexuals) to favor religious delusions over sexual orientation. Let's face it: people kill for religion; die for religion; and fuck for religion. Why wouldn't they switch genders of sex-partners for religion?
Moreover, as Carlson (2003) noted, “It may be possible that some of [Spitzer’s] research participants might have a more fluid sexual orientation, such as bisexuality” (p. 427). Also, Spitzer’s investigationwas heavily weighted toward highly religious Christian, Caucasian, middle-class individuals, thus ignoring the diversity of individuals who might seek conversion therapy. Overall, the research on conversion therapies is heavily weighted toward a homogeneous, predominantly White, male, Christian population. Shidlo and Schroeder’s (2002) participants were 90% male, 86% Caucasian, and of those who reported religious orientation, 89% Christian. Spitzer’s study was 97% Christian and 95% Caucasian and was predominantly middle-class and middle-aged.
Assumptions Made By Nutter Groups Like NARTH
Religious nutbars that think they can 'cure' homosexuality assume that the causes of homosexuality are known and that homosexuality is unnatural, mentally unhealthy, and sinful and should be changed. Each of these are pseudoscientific when applied to attempts at mental health.
Methodological problems with studies like Spitzer's
(a) results were based on restricted, self-selected samples that represent a socially stigmatized population and thus capitalized on participants’ vested interests to manage selfimpressions, promote their values and lifestyles, overreport successes, and underreport failures;
(b) outcomes are ambiguous because participants’ idiosyncratic conceptualizations of sexual orientation, identity, attraction, and desire were not analyzed and research variables were not well conceptualized;
(c) some studies neglected to use fantasy and arousal to indicate sexual orientation;
(d) some results were based on therapists’ subjective impressions;
(e) comparison or control groups were not used;
(f) long-term, objective outcome results are unavailable; and
(g) dynamic factors, such as time, maturation, and contextual factors, were not analyzed to account for participants’ changes in sexuality and identity development process. Thus, the research base that supports the effectiveness of sexual reorientation is void of systematic, well-established methodologies that are needed to obtain valid scientific results (Wainberg et al., 2003).
In addition, O’Donohue and Plaud (1994) reviewed the evidence for learning and unlearning of sexual arousal responses and concluded that the empirical support for the conditioning or reconditioning of sexual arousal is weak. Barbaree, Bogaert, and Seto (1995) also concluded that substantive changes in the direction of one’s underlying sexual orientation might be difficult or impossible to achieve once established.
Tozer & Hayes (2004) further note that 'reorientation' therapy lacks empirical validation and also suggest that the main focus is to provide derisive messages about same-sex attractions. They found that most who seek "conversion therapy" are do so as an "expression of introjected messages about unacceptable aspects of homosexuality and an extension of one’s being in the early stages of gay or lesbian identity development."
Woody's massive copy/paste and possible violation of Fair Use -but definately a violation of forum rules. A link would have sufficed.
The pseudoscientific extract of Luiz Sérgio Solimeo's book
Defending a Higher Law made liberal use of quotes mined from various sources sans context. Moreover, it made equally liberal use of fallacious arguments like "if homosexuality is natural, then why don't humans also engage in cannibalism or filicide? [paraphrasing]" First, it is completely fallacious to assume that because natural behaviors, instincts or acts that are common across taxa that
all behaviors, instincts and acts would therefore be common. What a dumbass. Second, both cannibalism and filicide are very much a part of human history and culture. We have the added infection of religious delusion that very often
causes these acts in humanity, but they
are present. I won't even bother citing references to them since they are common knowledge.
The author asserts: "Anyone engaged in the most elementary animal observation is forced to conclude that animal “homosexuality,” filicide and
cannibalism are exceptions to normal animal behavior. Consequently, one cannot speak of them as instincts in animal nature." From here, we can safely ignore the remaining dribble from the author, since it all hinges on this assertion.
The assertion is a mere assumption based on the
hope that that which the author (and his similarly biased religious/superstitious readers) deems most dispicable in nature is abherant and therefore not instinctual. I'll ignore the obvious strawman of going down the path of filicide/cannibalism and focus on the central theme: homosexuality.
If either are truly "exceptions" in nature, then they should be rare and not entirely predictable.
Unfortunately for religious nutbars: (and these were from just a few journals lying around)
Hoser (2005) noted that male-male sexual acts were common among Australian death adders.
Van Gossum et al (2005) comment that same-sex mating attempts are common among "many animal groups" and this challenges theories of sexual selection, which predict optimization of reproductive success.
Switzer et al (2004) agree and state that "homosexual pairing between males occurs under natural conditions in a wide variety of taxa, including many insect species." In their study group of Japanese beetles, they discovered that "[m]ale–male pairs were found in 30 of the 65 collection periods, with an average of 0.85 § 0.12 male–male pairs (3.4%) of 25 collected pairs (range, 0–3 pairs). In 3 years of sampling,we found that male Japanese beetles occasionally formed homosexual pairs in the field, with male–male pairs constituting approximately 1–6% of the pairs."
Bertran & Margalida (2003) found male-male mountings to be very common in polyandrous bearded vulture
Gypaetus barbatus trios. In 167 copulation attempts recorded between 1991–1992 and 2000–2001, the percentage of male-male mountings recorded were 26.1 and 11.4%, respectively.
And lest you think I'm omitting the data that exists on primates (our own suborder, Anthropoidea, no less), allow me to include O'Neill et al (2004) who state, "examples of same-sex mating behaviors have been widely reported across anthropoid species, and such behaviors have been observed in every family of primates except prosimians."
Solimeo was right to point out those quotes which remind us that applying human behavioral characteristics to other animals is a foolish endeavor. This is obvious. We can't possibly know their psychology since we're unable to ask them with the expectation of receiving an answer. But he was flat out wrong in asserting that homosexual behvaviors do not exist in nature in anything but a common and predictable manner. These behaviors may have their causes in many places: genetics, kin selection, aggression prevention, aggression management, pleasure, politics, etc. The quote-mined sources of Solimeo notwithstanding, there are observations of primate species that
appear to fulfill each of these causes at one time or another.
But the fact remains: male-male and female-female sex exists in nature with frequency and regularity and across many taxa.
References:
Religious Brainwashing Portion
Barbaree, H. E., Bogaert, A. F., & Seto, M. C. (1995). Sexual reorientation therapy for pedophiles: Practices and controversies. In L. D. & R. D. McAnulty (Eds.),
The psychology of sexual orientation, behavior, and identity: A handbook (pp. 357-383).Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Carlson, H. M. (2003). A methodological critique of Spitzer’s research on reparative therapy.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32, 425-427.
Haldeman, D. C. (2001). Therapeutic antidotes: Helping gay and bisexualmen recover from conversion therapies.
Journal of Gay and Lesbian Psychotherapy, 5(3-4), 117-130.
Moberly, Elizabeth (1983)
Homosexuality: A New Christian Ethic. Cambridge: James Clarke Company
O’Donohue, W., & Plaud, J. J. (1994). The conditioning of human sexual arousal.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 23, 321-344.
Shidlo, A., & Schroeder,M. (2002). Changing sexual orientation: A consumers’ report.
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 33, 249-259.
Spitzer, R. L. (2003). Can some gay men and lesbians change their sexual orientation? 200 subjects reporting a change from homosexual to heterosexual orientation. Archives of Sexual
Behavior, 32, 403-417.
Tozer, E. E. & Hayes, J. A. (2004). Why do individuals seek conversion therapy? The role of religiosity, internalized homonegativity, and identity development.
The Counseling Psychologist, 32(5), 716-740.
Wainberg, M. L., Bux, B., Carballo-Dieguez, A., Dowsett, G.W., Dugan, T., Forstein, M., et al. (2003). Science and the Nuremberg Code: A question of ethics and harm.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32, 455-457.
Homosexuality in Nature Portion
Hoser, Raymond (2005). Australian death adders in drag. Why being a he/she may help in the race to reproduce.
Herptile 30(4), 139-143.
Van Gossum, H. ; De Bruyn, L.; Stoks, R. (2005). Reversible switches between male-male and male-female mating behaviour by male damselflies
Biology Letters 1(3), 268-270.
O'Neill, Ann C.; Fedigan, Linda M.; Ziegler, Toni E. (2004) Ovarian cycle phase and same-sex mating behavior in Japanese macaque females
American Journal of Primatology 63(1), 25-31.
Switzer, Paul V.; Forsythe, Patrick S.; Escajeda, Kara; Kruse, Kipp C.
(2004). Effects of environmental and social conditions on homosexual pairing in the Japanese beetle (Popillia japonica Newman).
Journal of Insect Behavior 17(1), 1-16.
Bertran, Joan; Margalida, Antoni (2003). Male-male mountings in polyandrous bearded vultures Gypaetus barbatus: An unusual behaviour in raptors.
Journal of Avian Biology, 34(4), 334-338.
