Ex-Gay Ministry Works Just Fine

[Woody]

SL:

Given that you define homosexual as having no acceptable definition, the only plausible outcome, (given your statement), is that we're left with circular arguments and ambiguous, incongruous conclusions. If, like the rest of us, Spitzer cannot define what a homosexual is, what merit would his study have?

He defined it on the Kinsey scale. Does that give you a problem? The results were measured and compared on the Kinsey scale. If it's garbage, then why would anybody use it?

I have a better answer though: "Homosexual" can not be defined because it doesn't exist to start with. It's a mental illusion that twists sexual fantasies into phsyical acts that are impossible to fulfill. The illusion is based on unfortunate experiences and misdirected behavior to resolve them. Homosexual is behavior, not the person that exhibits that behaviour. It's a complex bundle of unmet emotional needs and natural sexual urges that a person is only trying to meet the best way they know how.

It is an illusion based on beauty, and the fantasies of fulfillment surrounding beauty. The sexual satisfaction from a homosexual relationship sets the neurological pattern for future sexual behavior and fulfillment. Each experience re-inforces the pattern. But eventually they find their emotional needs are unfilled in the long-run. As they grow older and romantic relationships shift from purely sexual to companionship this becomes more apparant. Hence some of them see the need to re-orient. The median age of the Spitzer study subjects was about 42 years of age. The primary reason they gave for changing behavior was unmet emotional needs.

My 2 cents on it, and go ahead and shoot holes through it if you wish. This is my compliation of all the portraits of the homosexuals I have known about and heard about in my lifetime which is going on 53 years. I've worked beside them, had some of them in my family, and known them from church. All I can say is that they have a tough job trying to re-orient. Why should anybody make their life more difficult?

 

[Cris]

woody,

The bible.

Which doesn't mention Lesbianism and only states that a man should not lie with another man. So we can assume Lesbianism is OK but that if a man is bi-sexual or simply occassionally homosexual then he should be put to death - is that correct?

But the bible really doesn't make a big thing out of homosexuality, and certainly virtually nothing in the NT. So why do so many Christians, you included, have such a problem with this?

BTW, I saw your red-letter note to delete content, have I deleted enough? I can cut it back some more if you want me to.

That's fine, just stay away from the big copy-pastes when a link would suffice.

If you want to bar my membership to sciforums, then that's ok with me to.

No way, you are far too entertaining.

 

[Woody]

woody,

Which doesn't mention Lesbianism and only states that a man should not lie with another man. So we can assume Lesbianism is OK but that if a man is bi-sexual or simply occassionally homosexual then he should be put to death - is that correct?

No. Jesus brought in the age of grace, which changes the consequences of these acts in our society.

Jesus said:

But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

There is no other marriage model.

But the bible really doesn't make a big thing out of homosexuality, and certainly virtually nothing in the NT. So why do so many Christians, you included, have such a problem with this?

Actually the bible, does make a pretty big deal out of all the sexual sins which include fornication, adultery, homosexuality, bestiality, pornography, whoredom, whoremongering, etc., etc.

People that live this lifestyle are assured a place in hell according to the bible. Hell is a pretty big deal to christians.

No way, you are far too entertaining.

That has been said before, and I'm glad you are only laughing with me instead of at me. Otherwise it would break my heart and embarrass me to tears. I'm only kidding of course.

 

[Woody]

SL said:

33. I am impressed. So now please.. tell me what those 33 were thinking or actually feeling. Can't do it, can you?

Yeah. I can tell you. They were thinking about getting married to the opposite sex. Gotta problem with that?

but you aint my friend

.

I'm truely touched.

Come on Woody.. the guy that has felt it his duty to preach continually during his stay here - to tell others what's right and wrong, what's true or not.. and you have the audacity to try and "preach" to others what they should "preach" or not? I would say: "don't be a hypocrite my friend",

Well who did you mistake me for anyway?

There goes Spitzer.

There he goes saying things you don't like, because it makes you feel guilty about the people you lied to.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

SL:

He defined it on the Kinsey scale. Does that give you a problem? The results were measured and compared on the Kinsey scale. If it's garbage, then why would anybody use it?

I have a better answer though: "Homosexual" can not be defined because it doesn't exist to start with. It's a mental illusion that twists sexual fantasies into phsyical acts that are impossible to fulfill. The illusion is based on unfortunate experiences and misdirected behavior to resolve them. Homosexual is behavior, not the person that exhibits that behaviour. It's a complex bundle of unmet emotional needs and natural sexual urges that a person is only trying to meet the best way they know how.

It is an illusion based on beauty, and the fantasies of fulfillment surrounding beauty. The sexual satisfaction from a homosexual relationship sets the neurological pattern for future sexual behavior and fulfillment. Each experience re-inforces the pattern. But eventually they find their emotional needs are unfilled in the long-run. As they grow older and romantic relationships shift from purely sexual to companionship this becomes more apparant. Hence some of them see the need to re-orient. The median age of the Spitzer study subjects was about 42 years of age. The primary reason they gave for changing behavior was unmet emotional needs.

My 2 cents on it, and go ahead and shoot holes through it if you wish. This is my compliation of all the portraits of the homosexuals I have known about and heard about in my lifetime which is going on 53 years. I've worked beside them, had some of them in my family, and known them from church. All I can say is that they have a tough job trying to re-orient. Why should anybody make their life more difficult?

*************
M*W: I've had many friend who are gay, and I've had a close relationship with them, both male and female. We've discussed many issues, and I've learned that trust and comfort is a big thing to them in a homosexual/lesbian relationship. It's not "attraction" per se, but a feeling of security. I can understand that. That's what all relationships need. In other words, sexual attraction is not on the top of the list.

Regardless of sexual identity, everyone needs a relationship where they can be comfortable and trust the other person. It's really not about sex.

Heterosexual relations are more likely to be about sex. How many heterosexual couples do you know who fight constantly, have sexual issues, and lack of trust? Just about every heterosexual couple I know has these issues! True, they may not be interested in the same sex at all, but they are unable to achieve a healthy relationship with the opposite sex. It tends to recur over and over again.

The happiest of all my friends are the gay ones. There's no games. There is trust, and there is comfort. What more could one ask of a relationship?

 

[SkinWalker]

What about the other subjects, especially those in public positions for the ex-gay movement? Do you just write them off as apparitions and UFOs?

We dismiss them as worthless, since they are anecdotal and not empirical. But, I'll tell you what: count the number of "testimonials" you have and list them in a single post. I have no doubt that I can post even more of the opposing view. This is why anecdote becomes worthless as a form of evidence.

The evidence in the study has already been provided. The measures for sexual orientation were in the area of sexual fantasies during masturbation, actual sexual relations, sexual fantasies during sexual intercourse, and the frequency of hetero v.s homosexual incidences for these measures. Do you have better measures than these? Let's hear it. Go ahead and show up Dr. Spitzer, a PHD psychiatrist, MD, and fellow for the APA.

Apparently Spitzer shows himself up quite well, your appeal to authority (yet another logical fallacy) notwithstanding. The suggestions I had were based in part on the recommendations and information Spitzer gave in the Discussion section of his paper. These recommendations are complimented and mirrored by other independent investigators in the field, both before and after Spitzer's publication.

But rather than apply the measures that Spitzer did to subjects hand-picked by the religious cults that claim to be adhering to scientific rigor, let's apply the measures to a much larger sample size, randomly picked from the entire client-base. This is as any therapeutic program should be. At the very least, such a program should have oversight control from an outside entity that audits the caseload for success measures.

What is the purpose of your study? The purpose of Spitzer's study was to show that homosexual behavior and the cause of it can be altered, like many other behaviors and their cause. The patients make the choice whether to change or not to change -- it is not forced on them.

Never mind the many studies, a few of which I cited, which say otherwise: many clients *are* coerced and forced on some level to participate. Moreover, there are many studies which conclude that the attempts to "convert" gays is detrimental. True enough, Spitzer claims to have not revealed this, but we have to keep in mind that a full 75% of his subjects were hand-picked by the pseudoscience organizations that wanted their premises and assumptions validated. Spitzer is one study in a sea of studies that say the opposite. The consensus among psychological and psychiatric professionals is that "conversion therapy" is bunk and harmful.

The "purpose" of an alternative study (many have been conducted already) would be to counter the pseudoscientific claims by "conversion therapy" frauds like NARTH and Exodus and provide advocacy for clients should who may be receiving bogus treatment.

Spitzer was asked about sexual re-orientation therapy: "What about the issue of the American Psychiatric Association to make the offering for the treatment of change unethical?"

Dr. Spitzer's response was:

This little bulletin you found was published a full 2 years before Spitzer's study. Let's stick with the study itself, Woody. In it, Spitzer said:

1. "The participants in the study all believed that the changes they experienced were due primarily to their therapy. However, the lack of a control group leaves the issue of causality open."

2. "The issue of causality can only be answered by a study with random assignment of gay men and lesbians wishing to change their sexual orientation to either a treatment group (some form of reparative therapy) or a control group."

3. "This study indicates that some gay men and lesbians, following reparative therapy, report that they have made major changes from a predominantly homosexual orientation to a predominantly heterosexual orientation." (the study does not conclude that gays do change).

4. "[A] possibility is that all of the individuals constructed elaborate self-deceptive narratives (or even lied) when they claimed to have changed, at least to some extent, their sexual orientation."

5. "It probably is the case that reparative therapy rarely, if ever, results in heterosexual arousal that is as intense as a person who never had same sex attractions."

6. "I think what people will say - and they are probably right - is that this will be used to pressure gays to go into therapy. It will be used by the people who are bigoted." -from the very bulletin you are citing. I found this passage ironic and prophetic.

SW, I think you are a ridiculous fraud against society.

Lucky for society the ad hominem opinion of a single bigot only matters to his fellow bigots. Fuck you very much.

And to all that are reading this thread: it is clear that Woody is basing his bigotry on a study he hasn't even read. What a pathetic case he is.

Would you like me to email it to you, Woody?
Do you still want a link to your Prophet Yahweh's kookery?

 

[Woody]

SW said,

Moreover, there are many studies which conclude that the attempts to "convert" gays is detrimental. True enough, Spitzer claims to have not revealed this, but we have to keep in mind that a full 75% of his subjects were hand-picked by the pseudoscience organizations that wanted their premises and assumptions validated.

How were they detrimental? In whose opinion? Wouldn't they (the practitioners) be sued in our american sue-happy society? Got any reference links to the lawsuits that would SURELY exist if your statement is indeed true.

Why does it matter that the subjects were handpicked? Isn't that what Spitzer asked for to start with -- evidence that re-orientation can work in at least one human individual on the planet?

This is where I am confused in your responses. You ask for evidence for re-orientation and then look the opposite direction from the evidence. This appears to be a repeating pattern of denial that I find quite frustrating, not just on homosexual therapy but on many other matters of faith. It looks like you want it both ways: appearing to want evidence but refusing to consider it for yourself when it is given.

The "purpose" of an alternative study (many have been conducted already) would be to counter the pseudoscientific claims by "conversion therapy" frauds like NARTH and Exodus and provide advocacy for clients should who may be receiving bogus treatment.

There are many other worldwide organizations that are conducting this therapy what do you think about JONAH.

BTW, What do you think about Alchoholics Anonymous? Is it bogus too?

Here is a list of organizations that participate in re-orientation therapy.

Re-orientation therapy

Rather than continue rehashing with yourself, SL, etc I will ask individuals that are ex-gay personally about their changes.

I propose you provide me with the guidelines for interviewing with them to determine their success. I do not want to be offensive to them, and you have a knack for being this way with people that don't think the same as yourself. I would like to keep the dialogue friendly and cordial with the "subjects" as you call it. I really hate it when you depersonalize people. It's so sterile, uncaring, and unfeeling.

I will agree with you upfront that it is very hard for a homosexual to re-orient. As one pastor said, in the approximately half-dozen homosexuals he has counselled maybe one of them converted but that conversion remains questionable. He has been more successful exorcising demons.

Thought you'd get a chuckle out of that.

Lucky for society the ad hominem opinion of a single bigot only matters to his fellow bigots. Fuck you very much.

You aren't very welcome. I have news for you, everyone in this world is prejudiced - and that includes you. If you disagree then you are just being the dishonest puke-bag liberal that you are.


BTW, yeah, give me the prophet yahweh link again will you?

 

[SnakeLord]

He defined it on the Kinsey scale. Does that give you a problem?

Certainly not, but apparently it does give you a problem. It was you after all that stated we can't define "homosexual".

The results were measured and compared on the Kinsey scale. If it's garbage, then why would anybody use it?

Probably the same reason you used prophet yahweh's opinions as "proof positive" of the existence of particular gods. I suppose when you have nothing better, you just use whatever you can find in the hopes that it actually counts for something.

I have a better answer though: "Homosexual" can not be defined because it doesn't exist to start with.

See? Once again you state that 'homosexual' cannot be defined, in which case Spitzer clearly can't do any tests with homosexuals, because nobody can define what a homosexual is.. according to you.

The median age of the Spitzer study subjects was about 42 years of age. The primary reason they gave for changing behavior was unmet emotional needs.

A good time for a mid life crisis. How worthwhile would the data be? I mean c'mon, I know of literally hundreds of mid 40 year olds that have gone out one day and bought themselves a sports car or a villa in France. It doesn't make them French or a sports racer, (or the 20 year old they wish they could be once more). A homosexual going through a mid life crisis is hardly valuable data.

Yeah. I can tell you. They were thinking about getting married to the opposite sex. Gotta problem with that?

Marry? Sheesh they didn't waste time. Life long homosexual - hasn't even met a woman he fancies and he's already thinking about marriage?

There he goes saying things you don't like, because it makes you feel guilty about the people you lied to

? What are you blithering on about?

 

[Woody]

SL said,

Probably the same reason you used prophet yahweh's opinions as "proof positive" of the existence of particular gods.

That is not what I said. I see the communication here is no longer working.

Since nobody can get over prophet yahweh and look at the other evidence provided, since that is such an blinding show-stopper for everyone, this discussion is over.

OK the ex-gay movement doesn't really exist. We read about it in the news, but it's just a UFO like Skinwalker said. Nobody is getting treatment for sexual re-orientation. Mrs. Walls is just a fake that wasn't really a lesbian to start with, and now she is lobbying Washington to inflict misery on homosexuals. It's all a scheme to put all homosexuals through re-orientation therapy. Dr. Spitzer wants to be in charge of a homosexual re-orientation concentration camp where he can gas all those that fail. He even said he'd kill his own son if he was homosexual.

We should just hate ex-gays: hate-them hate-them hate-them because they violate the same sex marriage institution we want for them. They should forfiet half their life with AIDS to show their allegiance. Shame on them for wanting a different life than this. Shame Shame Shame.

OK, I hope you liked it.

 

[SnakeLord]

Since nobody can get over prophet yahweh

Seemingly you as well, who picked that one sentence while ignoring the rest of my post.

 

[Woody]

SL said,

Probably the same reason you used prophet yahweh's opinions as "proof positive" of the existence of particular gods.

That is not what I said. I see the communication here is no longer working.

Since nobody can get over prophet yahweh and look at the other evidence provided, since that is such a blinding show-stopper for everyone, this discussion is over.

OK the ex-gay movement doesn't really exist. We read about it in the news, but it's just a UFO like Skinwalker said. Nobody is getting treatment for sexual re-orientation. Mrs. Wall is just a fake that wasn't really a lesbian to start with, and now she is lobbying Washington to inflict misery on homosexuals. It's all a scheme to put all homosexuals through re-orientation therapy. Dr. Spitzer wants to be in charge of a homosexual re-orientation concentration camp where he can gas all those that fail. He even said he'd kill his own son if he was homosexual.

We should just hate ex-gays: hate-them hate-them hate-them because they violate the same sex marriage institution we want for them. They should forfiet half their life with AIDS to show their allegiance. Shame on them for wanting a different life than this. Shame Shame Shame.

And the ex-gays that are now married -- they just did it to make family and friends happy -- you know the same reason anyone gets married, just ask Skin Walker.

And those wretched interviews with Dr. Spitzer's survey team: Well those ex-gays just lied about wanting to help others that are unhappy with their sexual feelings. Nah, they just want to pump them up with false hope so they can suffer the same way they suffered in re-orientation therapy. It's the sadist in them you see. It's all a scam to convert homosexuals into sado-masochists, and then unleash them on the general public for a gay bashing.

There. I hope you liked it.

 

[Hapsburg]

i for one... want to here more... and i applaud those with the strenght of character who for various reasons have abandonned being gay, and living in complete sin...

How is abandoning who they are a strength of character? If anything, that just shows that they can be brainwashed into being anything else but themselves.
And how is homosexuality a sin? Technically speaking, sin doesn't even exist, as there is no universal morality. Even if there were, how could a natural phenomenon be morally wrong?

 

[Woody]

As I said before, I'm turning my attention to the ex-gay forum.

Well, looks like I got some e-mail.

Awww those hateful Gay activist bigots, there they go again .. From my e-mail:

Did you know that Exodus, Courage, Jonah, and other
ex-gay groups have experienced one of the largest
short-term influx of calls for information and
assistance in the history of the ex-gay movement, the
majority being from unchurched or nominally religious
folks, especially young adults, after a supporting
actress in a scene on one of the episodes of the HBO
series "Sopranos" just mentioned that there are,
"...churches that can cure them". Believe me, the
producers of the popular show are experiencing the
wrath of gay activism and their bleeding heart liberal
supporters. I'm confident that Richard and other
ex-gay groups will experience the same, both much
condemnation and inquiries. I don't believe Richard
could be bothered by whatever gay activists say about
him, since they are not his intended audience and it
is clear that the truth is not as important to them as
defending their way of life.

Ahh yes, hope is always greeted with puke-bag liberal hatred. You know the same 'ol same 'ol.

I'll keep everyone posted with the wonderful progress being made in re-orientation therapy, and all those conversions to christianity that will surely result. I just want to make sure everyone is as thrilled as I am. Happiness to all.

I have professional guidelines for administering re-orientation therapy. Only good enough for people with the highest ethics.

Several Psychiatrists are onboard:

Statements of Support
David Blakeslee, PsyD
Nicholas Cummings, PhD
Kenyon Knapp, PhD
David Pruden, MS
Michael Rosebush, PhD

I believe they have sciforums therapists outnumbered already. The big difference of course, is they are able to help people make the change they want to make, unlike the sore losers on sciforums that hate everyone they cant change to their puke-bag philosophy.

 

[Woody]

Seemingly you as well, who picked that one sentence while ignoring the rest of my post.

Marry? Sheesh they didn't waste time. Life long homosexual - hasn't even met a woman he fancies and he's already thinking about marriage?

Sheesh, who are you talking to. You didn't read the Spitzer study. The majority of the subjects that were in the totally gay category later got married. As I said before, the communication just isn't working. I'll keep you all posted on my investigation into gay re-orientation therapy. I'm looking for a secular version of it, but to little avail. Without the motivation of religion, perhaps it's not possible to re-orient.

I know positively that there are people that have re-oriented, gotten married, and have been very open about their struggle. It really is heartbreaking. I guess I'm the only on that feels that way. That's the impression I get here. I see how others have been treated here.

 

[SkinWalker]

Anecdotes, anecdotes, anecdotes. That's all you keep going on about.

Woody, your a pathetic human being. Enjoy your gay friends who keep telling you their "ex" gay.

You didn't read the Spitzer study.

I've seen no evidence that you've read the study. Tell me, Woody, what was the last sentence on page 406?

 

[Woody]

SW said:

Woody, your a pathetic human being. Enjoy your gay friends who keep telling you their "ex" gay.

I feel likewise about you. I'd have to say you are one of the most hard-hearted people I've ever met. You show no human compassion at all.

Take the guy that was experimenting with Near Death Experiences some time ago. You and SL were just encouraging him to continue at the risk of his own life. The truth is you did not care, and neither did SL. What happened to the poor guy that was trying these experiments? Whenever I say yes you say no, whenever I say no you say yes. It's like I'm argueing with the devil himself, and maybe I am. I'd have to say you are a lot like him.

I've seen no evidence that you've read the study. Tell me, Woody, what was the last sentence on page 406?

That's because I haven't read a 400 something page study by DR. Spitzer. I read the executive summary that Spitzer presented at the APA convention. Do you have a link to the 400 page study? Are you telling me his executive summary is inconsistent with his study results? Are you telling me he went public before all his peers with deliberately falsified information? THat would be a disaster for his career wouldn't it? He would be dis-barred would he not?

 

[SkinWalker]

The study is only a few pages long. That's the page number of the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior. There is no "bar" association for therapists, Woody. And, in the same issue of ASB, many of Spitzer's peers commented on his research, most of them pointing out the very flaws I mentioned in this thread.

Spitzer's work was good and even he recognized some problems. But it in no way supports the premises and assumptions that the pseudoscience organizations like NARTH and Exodus have with regard to "conversion."

Sptizer's main problem was that the study wasn't longitudinal. Such studies are typically funded by the organizations that hope to benefit from them, but, curiously, NARTH, Exodus, et al have shied away from such data. Perhaps it has to do with the lack of success that they were already painfully aware of. Among the ex-gay ministries that initially started, something like 8 of them closed because their directors remained homosexual. When NARTH began, the clients kept sleeping with each other, causing major problems. There are probably as many or more anecdotes of failures as there are successes (which is one reason to dismiss anecdotal evidence).

You attempt to paint me as without compassion, yet it is because of compassion that I refuse to accept the selfish motives of these ministries. The clients are real people with real problems aside from being homosexual. Homosexual is what they are in some cases. Bisexual is what they were in most of Spitzer's subjects. When they're told over and over that they are going to hell, they're abominations, that they're abherent to society and no better than child molestors, that they're behavior is unacceptable, that they're fags, that they can never gain entry in the "kingdom of heaven" because of who they are, these people become depressed, suicidal, experience undo anxiety, and develop a whole host of mental health issues based on the mythology of the cult they wish to belong to.

If that's what they have to go through in order to join the cult, that's their prerogative. However, if the cults want to make claims that they assert are scientific to further their agendas, this becomes fraud and the clients are being taken advantage of.

 

[Woody]

SW said,

If that's what they have to go through in order to join the cult, that's their prerogative. However, if the cults want to make claims that they assert are scientific to further their agendas, this becomes fraud and the clients are being taken advantage of.

That is not what anyone wants to go through. Don't kid yourself. Every human being that comes to the church has to struggle with sexual issues -- don't kid yourself there either.

The Jesus I believe in is able to care for these people. It has been an issue throughout the history of the church. As Paul said "such were some of you" that were in the church in his day (he was referring to homosexuals).

Before I go any further with this I have to be honest when I say I've seen people change from gay to straight and I've seen people change from straight to gay. That doesn't mean everyone can do it, or that they have to do it. My wife is a mental health nurse and she has seen likewise. So has my sister who is a social work counsellor.

Nobody has homosexuality all figured out.

 

[SnakeLord]

You and SL were just encouraging him to continue at the risk of his own life. The truth is you did not care, and neither did SL.

Really? Give me the thread and I'll check.

 

[Woody]

And the professional opinions keep coming in. I'm going to be quite busy reviewing them:

Yet, Another Attempt To
Discredit The Spitzer Study Fails

by Daniel E. Byrne, Ph.D.

Most scientists would agree, particularly with the need for
comprehensive and accurate representation of scientific findings. No
one is benefited when science is misrepresented or misused to support
political agendas.

The real scholarly responses to the Spitzer study in this publication
came from three academics: Dr. Byrd, Dr. Yarhouse and Dr.
Hershberger. Each of these scholars, all of whom have immaculate
academic credentials, offers thoughtful responses to the Spitzer
study. Each makes a different but important contribution in their
analyses of this significant study.

Dr. Byrd's Response

From Dr. Byrd: "The Spitzer study essentially reopens the debate over
whether homosexuality is mutable. ...Indeed Spitzer provides evidence
that some gay men and lesbians are not only able to change self-
identity, but are able to modify core features of sexual orientation,
including fantasies. ...Spitzer's sample size was larger than those
of most prior studies. He carefully considered the components of the
homosexual experience and was considerably more detailed in his
assessment than were other studies. ...Virtually any bias in the
interview coding was eliminated by the near perfect interrater
scores."

Well, so much for SL's claim that the results were tainted by subjectiveness.

Dr. Yarhouse's Response

From Dr. Yarhouse. Of the Spitzer study, Dr. Yarhouse notes "it has
given a voice to the disenfranchised within a minority group...the
Spitzer study supports the view that some people experience a change
in sexual orientation."

Dr. Yarhouse cites supportive research from Shidlo and Schroeder who
had to change the name of their study when they discovered the
possibility of successful change in some of their subjects (The
Schidlo and Schroeder study was originally title, "Homophobic
Therapies: Documenting the Damage." The title was later changed
to "Changing Sexual Orientation: Does Counseling Work?" because they
found that some people reported benefits to reorientation therapy
including a change of sexual orientation.

Shidlo and Schroeder are both gay, by the way.

Yarhouse notes that whatever methodological limitations might be
found in the Spitzer study--such as self-report--are similar to those
limitations found in lesbian, gay, and bisexual research as well.
Even the Schidlo and Schroeder study is subject to the same
methodological criticisms leveled at the Spitzer study.

Finally, Yarhouse concludes that the key to understanding the Spitzer
study is to understand what Dr. Spitzer intended, which was to study
whether anyone had ever experienced a change of sexual orientation.
Ironically, Spitzer's study was not so different from that of Evelyn
Hooker who asked the question as to whether or not homosexuals are
manifestly disturbed. Hooker did not prove that all homosexuals are
healthy, just as Spitzer did not prove that all homosexuals can
change their sexual orientation.

But Spitzer's study did answer the question, "Is it ever possible for
a person with a homosexual orientation to report change in the
direction of a heterosexual orientation?"

And the answer to that question is, "Yes."

Dr. Hershberger's Response

Dr. Scott Hershberger's contribution was perhaps the most unique
among the three scholarly responses. His chapter is titled "Guttman
Scalability Confirms the Effectiveness of Reparative Therapy."

Dr. Hershberger's contribution is unique because he is an
essentialist, a distinguished scholar and statistician who has voiced
his belief that homosexuality is biologically determined.

Apparently Dr. Hershberger questioned the legitimacy of the subjects'
responses in the Spitzer study and decided to subject the Spitzer
study to a Guttman scalability analysis to answer his question. The
Guttman test is a scalagram which is used to determine where or not
reported changes occur in a cumulative, orderly fashion.

Subsequent to the Guttman analysis, Hershberger concluded, "The
orderly, law-like pattern of changes in homosexual sexual behavior,
homosexual self-identification, and homosexual attraction and fantasy
observed in Spitzer's study is strong evidence that reparative
therapy can assist individuals in changing their homosexual
orientation to a heterosexual orientation. Now it is up to those
skeptical of reparative therapy to provide strong evidence to support
their position. In my opinion, they have yet to do so."

OOPS

Spitzer's research does not lend support to the gay agenda, an agenda
whose foundation is based on innate-immutable theory of
homosexuality. The Spitzer study essentially re-opens the debate on
the malleability of homosexuality. With the re-opening of the debate
in the academy comes the permission to conduct research.

And the recent Karten dissertation sponsored by Fordham University is
an example of such research. The Karten study takes the Spitzer
research a step further to determine what factors make a difference
in the transition from homosexual to heterosexual orientation.